mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
To: Tim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: gradual timeofday overhaul
Date: 20 Oct 2004 03:47:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1098258460.26595.4320.camel@d845pe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0410200441210.11067@gockel.physik3.uni-rostock.de>

On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 23:05, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> I think we could do it in the following steps:
> 
>   1. Sync up jiffies with the monotonic clock,...
>   2. Decouple jiffies from the actual interrupt counter...
>   3. Increase HZ all the way up to 1e9....

> Thoughts?

Yes, for long periods of idle, I'd like to see the periodic clock tick
disabled entirely.  Clock ticks causes the hardware to exit power-saving
idle states.

The current design with HZ=1000 gives us 1ms = 1000usec between clock
ticks.  But some platforms take nearly that long just to enter/exit low
power states; which means that on Linux the hardware pays a long idle
state exit latency (performance hit) but gets little or no power savings
from the time it resides in that idle state.

thanks,
-Len



  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-20  8:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-19 18:21 process start time set wrongly at boot for kernel 2.6.9 Jerome Borsboom
2004-10-19 20:11 ` john stultz
2004-10-20  0:42   ` Tim Schmielau
2004-10-20  0:59     ` john stultz
2004-10-20  3:05       ` gradual timeofday overhaul Tim Schmielau
2004-10-20  7:47         ` Len Brown [this message]
2004-10-20 15:09           ` George Anzinger
2004-10-20 15:59             ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-10-20 15:17           ` George Anzinger
2004-10-20 17:09           ` Lee Revell
2004-10-20 21:42             ` Len Brown
2004-10-20 18:13         ` john stultz
2004-10-20 14:51       ` process start time set wrongly at boot for kernel 2.6.9 George Anzinger
2004-10-20 17:42         ` john stultz
2004-10-20 23:52           ` George Anzinger
2004-10-21  0:25             ` john stultz
2004-10-21  1:04               ` George Anzinger
2004-10-27  7:55   ` Tim Schmielau
2004-10-21  8:32 gradual timeofday overhaul Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-10-21 21:17 ` George Anzinger
2004-10-21 22:40   ` Chris Friesen
2004-10-25 23:12     ` George Anzinger
2004-10-25 23:51       ` Chris Friesen
2004-10-21 21:32 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-10-21 22:36 ` Chris Friesen
2004-10-22  0:21 ` George Anzinger
2004-10-22  0:29 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1098258460.26595.4320.camel@d845pe \
    --to=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=george@mvista.com \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®