Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 20:31 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> why?

Because the minimum poll/select timeout is now 4ms rather than 1ms.  An
app that has a soft RT constraint somewhere in the middle that worked on
2.6.12 will break on 2.6.13.

> it's a config option. Some distros ship 100 already, others 1000, again
> others will do 250. What does it matter?
> (Although I still prefer 300 over 250 due to the 50/60 thing)
> 
> This is not a userspace visible thing really with few exceptions, and
> well people can select the one they want, right?

Then why not leave the default at 1000?

Lee

-
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]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]
  Powered by Linux