Re: 2.6.13-rt6, ktimer subsystem

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>]

On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 15:35 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
> 
> In the early HRT patches the whole timer list was replaced with a hashed 
> list.  It was O(N/M) on insertion where we could easily choose M (for a 
> while it was even a config option).  Removal was just an unlink, same as 
> the cascade list.
> 
> To be clear on my take on this, as I understand it the rblist is 
> something like O(N*somelog 2).  What is left out here is the fixed 
> overhead of F which is there even if N = 1.  So we have something like 
> (F+O(f(N)) for a list.  For the most part we don't look at F, but as 
> list complexity grows, it gets larger thus pushing out the cross over 
> point to a higher "N" when comparing two lists.  I considered the rbtree 
> when doing the secondary list for HRT and concluded that "N" was small 
> enough that a simple O(N/2) list would do just fine as it would only 
> contain timers set to expire in the next jiffie.

The fact that we know in advance that a system is only going to a very
small number of these timers should be noted. You could just use a
regular list , and limit the total number of timers . I would hesitate
to stick a big data structure in when your only dealing with one or two
timers on average..

George, what's largest number of highres timers that someone might
need/want?

Daniel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/