Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification

[George Anzinger]

Andi Kleen wrote:
~>
> If you do a new structure for this I would suggest adding a
> "precision" field (or the same with a different name). Basically
> precision would tell the kernel that the wakeup can be in a time
> range, not necessarily on the exact time specified. This helps
> optimizing the idle loop because you can batch timers better and is
> important for power management and virtualized environments. The
> kernel internally does not use support this yet, but there are plans
> to change the internal timers in this direction and if you're defining
> a new user interface I would add support for this.
>
> I am not sure precision would be the right name, other suggestions
> are welcome.

I think the accepted and standard way to do this is to use different "clock"s. 
For example, in the HRT patch the clocks CLOCK_REALTIME_HR and 
CLOCK_MONOTONIC_HR are defined as high resolution clocks.
>
~
--
George Anzinger   george@xxxxxxxxxx
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/