Rogan Dawes wrote:
I guess my point was if we somehow get to an odd number of nanoseconds, we'd end up with rounding errors. I'm not sure if your algorithm will ever allow that.
And Ingo's point was that when it takes thousands of nanoseconds for a single context switch, an error of half a nanosecond is down in the noise.
Chris - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Rogan Dawes <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- References:
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Con Kolivas <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Rogan Dawes <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- From: Rogan Dawes <[email protected]>
- Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- Prev by Date: Re: review: don't block non-blocking writes when frozen
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3
- Previous by thread: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- Next by thread: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
- Index(es):
 |