Re: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3

[Tony Lindgren]

* George Anzinger <george@xxxxxxxxxx> [050809 13:07]:
>
> >>I can take a shot at addressing these concerns in dynamic_tick patch, but 
> >>it seems to me that VST has already addressed all these to a big extent. 
> >>Had you considered VST before? The biggest bottleneck I see in VST going 
> >>mainline is its dependency on HRT patch but IMO it should be possible to 
> >>write a small patch
> >>to support VST w/o HRT. 
> >>
> >>George, what do you think?
> >
> >
> >HRT + VST depend on APIC only, and does not use next_timer_interrupt().
> 
> I convinced my self that the next_timer... code in timer.c misses timers 
> (i.e. gives the wrong answer).  I did this (after wondering due to 
> performance) by scanning the whole timer list after I had the 
> next_timer... answer and finding a better answer, not always, but some 
> times.  That code does not address the cascade list correctly.

Do you have a patch around for improving next_timer_interrupt()?

Tony
-
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/