On 7/31/06, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
OK, if you meant this one (that hadn't shown up here before I hit 'send'):
No, I ment this one: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/30/193
(or actually its parent, at the time).
was commenting about. A gkrellm-ish program can query every 100ms and
get a cached value 49 times out of 50 for a value that's hardware-updated
every 5 seconds, and all will be well (of course, there's room for some
added optimization,
That's exactly what we're trying to avoid -- excessive polling of
values that don't change. It causes unnecessary system load and timer
interrupts on tickless kernels.
unless the kernel has
a good way to pass back a good hint of when the next update will be...)
The kernel often doesn't know when it will get the next update. But on
the other hand, apps usually know well in advance when they'll *want*
the next update. My proposal exploits this to get optimal behavior (if
the driver+infrastructure do the right thing).
Shem
-
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]
