Re: [PATCH 01/13] hrtimer: round up relative start time

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

 



Hi,

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> > Let's assume a get_time() which simply returns xtime and so has a 
> > resolution of around TICK_NSEC. This means the real time when one 
> > calls get_time() is somewhere between xtime and xtime+TICK_NSEC.  
> > Assuming the real time is xtime+TICK_NSEC-1, get_time() will return 
> > xtime and a relative timer with TICK_NSEC-1 will expire immediately.
> 
> i agree that on systems where get_time() has a TICK_NSEC resolution, 
> such short timeouts are bad.
> 
> i dont agree with the fix though: it penalizes platforms where 
> ->get_time() resolution is sane.

How do you want to tell one from the other?
Can we agree, that this is the behaviour 2.6 currently already has anyway?
I fully agree, that this patch is not the best solution, but is it really 
such a problem that we can't postpone the behaviour change for a short 
while until we can fix it properly (i.e. via a proper clock framework)? 

bye, Roman
-
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]
  Powered by Linux