On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, George Anzinger wrote:
>
> So, in short, I don't see the point to the suggested change. If the kernel is
> late, it is best to let it catch up as fast as it can by looping here. The only
> counter argument that makes sense to me it that in this case we are starving
> other softirqd driven tasks, but that should, if any thing, lighten the timer
> load and let this complete faster.
I'm mainly concerned because that loop never breaks . It seems like there
could be a condition when the loop never stops. For instance , a very
accurate timer interrupt, and timers that continually reset themselves.
Daniel
-
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]
