On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 01:04 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, john stultz wrote:
>
> > Accumulate time in update_wall_time exponentially.
> > This avoids long running loops seen with the dynticks patch
> > as well as the problematic hang" seen on systems with broken
> > clocksources.
>
> This is the wrong approach, second_overflow() should be called every HZ
> increment steps and your patch breaks this.
First, forgive me, since I've got a bit of a head cold, so I'm even
slower then usual. I just don't see how this patch changes the behavior.
Every second we will call second_overflow. But in the case where we
skipped 100 ticks, we don't loop 100 times. Could you explain this a bit
more?
> There are other approaches oo accommodate dyntick.
> 1. You could make HZ in ntp_update_frequency() dynamic and thus reduce the
> frequency with which update_wall_time() needs to be called (Note that
> other clock variables like cycle_interval have to be adjusted as well).
I'm not sure how this is functionally different from what this patch
does.
> 2. If dynticks stops the timer interrupt for a long time, it could
> precalculate a few things, e.g. it could complete the second and then
> advance the time in full seconds.
Not following this one at all.
Again, sorry for being so thick.
-john
-
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]
