Daniel Walker wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 12:37 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote:
There is already a dynamic tick (NO_HZ) system in the -mm tree .. Given
that this implementation seems unnecessary. Why do you need another
different system to do this?
We don't. This was written before the dynamic tick code, and now they
need to be merged. Until then, they can safely coexist.
So really this can't go upstream till that merge happens. What's
preventing you from just directly using NO_HZ without changes?
For one thing, the fact that it doesn't account for stolen time. But
mostly because going through the regular PIT / APIC timer paths has a
lot of overhead. So we need a separate timer device, and weaving this
in with the local APIC timer dependency for SMP on i386 requires changes
on top of NO_HZ.
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
