From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263361AbVGOSBl (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:01:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263351AbVGOR7S (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:59:18 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:47273 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263355AbVGOR6U (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:58:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:58:19 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi , Andi Kleen , "Brown, Len" , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, vojtech@suse.cz, christoph@lameter.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt Message-ID: <20050715175819.GF15783@wotan.suse.de> References: <20050715102349.A15791@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > That's like scratching your left ear with your right hand -- broadcasting > that external timer interrupt in the first place is more straightforward. > If you want to exclude CPUs from the list of receivers, just use the > logical destination mode appropriately. The problem with that is that it would need regular synchronizations of all CPUs to coordinate this. Not good for scalability and I believe the fundamentally wrong way to do this. -Andi