From: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com>
Cc: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>,
root@chaos.analogic.com, "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>,
Tim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>,
john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: gradual timeofday overhaul
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:12:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <417D8846.3090308@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41783AE7.8040705@nortelnetworks.com>
Chris Friesen wrote:
> George Anzinger wrote:
>
>> Well, that is part of the accounting overhead the increases with
>> context switch rate. You also need to include the time it takes to
>> figure out which of the time limits is closes (run time limit, profile
>> time, slice time, etc). Then, you also need to remove the timer when
>> switching away. No, it is not a lot, but it is way more than the
>> nothing we do when we can turn it all over to the periodic tick. The
>> choice is load sensitive overhead vs flat overhead.
>
>
> It should be possible to be clever about this. Most processes don't use
> their timeslice, so if we have a previous timer running, just keep track
> of how much beyond that timer our timeslice will be. If we context
> switch before the timer expiry, well and good. If the timer expires,
> set it for what's left of our timeslice.
Me thinks that rather quickly devolves to a periodic tick.
--
George Anzinger george@mvista.com
High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-26 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-21 8:32 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-10-21 21:17 ` George Anzinger
2004-10-21 22:40 ` Chris Friesen
2004-10-25 23:12 ` George Anzinger [this message]
2004-10-25 23:51 ` Chris Friesen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-22 0:29 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-10-21 21:32 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-10-21 22:36 ` Chris Friesen
2004-10-22 0:21 ` George Anzinger
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
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
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=417D8846.3090308@mvista.com \
--to=george@mvista.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com \
--cc=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome