Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 7 Sep 2008 14:07:46 -0700 | | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | | Subject | Re: update on hrtimer based select/poll and range-hrtimers |
| |
On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:46:39 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > "0.1% of the time" for not-nice, not realtime tasks > > "0.5% of the time" for nice, not realtime tasks > > with a cap of 100msec for both. > > > > I would like to request feedback on this approach; I think this is > > better than the "hardcoded steps" as before, but maybe someone can > > come up with an ever better idea.... > > logarithms pop to mind (again :-)
and it still doesn't strike me as "oh yeah"
how would you see this work? Can you give a numeric example?
> > > static unsigned long __estimate_accuracy(struct timespec *tv) > > { > > unsigned long slack; > > int divfactor = 1000; > > > > if (task_nice(current)) > > This triggers for both -nice and +nice tasks, it might be worth > differentiating between those.
good spotting; will fix.
> > > > if (current->policy == SCHED_FIFO || > > current->policy == SCHED_RR) > > return 0; > > rt_task(current) ?
hmm that's not exactly equivalent.. I can see either but still.
-- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org
|  |