On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 11:42 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2006-06-26 09:16:37, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > I got NO_HZ working on ARM, but because the ARM tree already
> > extensively implements NO_IDLE_HZ I had to make NO_HZ a
> > completely seprate option.
>
> So... what is the difference between NO_HZ and NO_IDLE_HZ?
NO_HZ is a generic version of dynamic tick. NO_IDLE_HZ has some generic
parts but is mostly implemented by the architecture. In this case ARM
fully implements NO_IDLE_HZ, which then collides with NO_HZ if they
depend on each other.
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]
