Re: No 100 HZ timer!

From: Bret Indrelee (bret@io.com)
Date: Thu Apr 12 2001 - 23:00:41 EST


On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> Bret Indrelee wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> > > Bret Indrelee wrote:
> > > > Keep all timers in a sorted double-linked list. Do the insert
> > > > intelligently, adding it from the back or front of the list depending on
> > > > where it is in relation to existing entries.
> > >
> > > I think this is too slow, especially for a busy system, but there are
> > > solutions...
> >
> > It is better than the current solution.
>
> Uh, where are we talking about. The current time list insert is real
> close to O(1) and never more than O(5).

I don't like the cost of the cascades every (as I recall) 256
interrupts. This is more work than is done in the rest of the interrupt
processing, happens during the tick interrupt, and results in a rebuild of
much of the table.

-Bret

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bret Indrelee | Sometimes, to be deep, we must act shallow!
bret@io.com | -Riff in The Quatrix

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 15 2001 - 21:00:20 EST