On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 01:13:19 +0900 (JST)
Atsushi Nemoto <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 16:02:43 +0200, "Martin Schwidefsky" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Good start, now you only have the change the 30+ calls to do_timer in
> > the various architecture backends.
>
> OK, then this is a patch contains the changes.
> Adding S390 maintainer Martin Schwidefsky to CC.
>
> This patch is against current git tree, so does not contains a change
> to arch/avr32 which is in mm tree. I can create a patch against mm
> tree if expected.
>
>
> [PATCH] cleanup do_timer and update_times
>
> Pass ticks to do_timer() and update_times().
>
> This also make a barrier added by
> 5aee405c662ca644980c184774277fc6d0769a84 needless.
>
> Also adjust x86_64 and s390 timer interrupt handler with this change.
>
This is a rather terse description for a change of this nature..
Why was this patch created? What problem is it solving? etcetera.
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/timer.c
> @@ -1218,7 +1218,7 @@ static inline void calc_load(unsigned lo
> static int count = LOAD_FREQ;
>
> count -= ticks;
> - if (count < 0) {
> + while (count < 0) {
> count += LOAD_FREQ;
> active_tasks = count_active_tasks();
> CALC_LOAD(avenrun[0], EXP_1, active_tasks);
OK, we do need the loop here to get the arithmetic in CALC_LOAD to work
correctly.
But I don't think the expensive count_active_tasks() needs to be evaluated
each time around.
-
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]
