On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 02:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > With rc4-rt13 and changing cycle_t to u64, my machine ran all night
> > without one backward step. Since it use to show up after a couple of
> > hours, I would say that this is the fix.
> >
> > John, Do you want me to take a crack at changing the periodic_hook into
> > using the ktimer code? I understand Ingo's kernel much more than you, but
> > you definitely understand the timing code better than I.
>
> Steve,
>
> I think the hook is too complex to move it into the timer interrupt
> context. We still have to reimplement the dynamic priority adjustment of
> the ktimer softirq in a clean way. Once this is done, we can move it
> over and set a proper priority up for that.
>
OK, but the u64 cycle_t should stay. Even with the dynamic priority of
the softirq, a process with a super high priority that doesn't care about
the timing code can still make the periodic_hook delay for a few seconds.
-- Steve
-
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]
