Re: [RFC] Imprecise timers.

[Rene Herman]

On 22-07-08 05:02, David Woodhouse wrote:

> Many users of timers don't really care too much about exactly when
> their timer fires -- and waking a CPU to satisfy such a timer is a
> waste of power. This patch implements a 'range' timer which will fire
> at a 'convenient' moment within given constraints.
>
> It's implemented by a deferrable timer at the beginning of the range,
> which will run some time later when the CPU happens to be awake. And
> a non-deferrable timer at the hard deadline, to ensure it really does
> happen by then.

Are there actually users for this (not just in theory)? The deferrable 
timer sort of sounds like all I'd ever want if I, as you say, wouldn't 
really care...

Rene.
--
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/