Re: [PATCH 0/2] Dynamic Tick: Enabling longer sleep times on 32-bit machines

[john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 14:57 -0600, Jon Hunter wrote:
> john stultz wrote:
> > I could have sworn this was in mainline by now, but I recently was
> > looking for the code and can't find it there or in -tip either.
> > 
> > Thomas, are they just hiding somewhere I can't find?
> > 
> > Jon, you've been terribly patient and great about resubmitting these
> > patches over and over. If I'm not just being crazy and missing these
> > patches in front of my nose, are you still willing to submit them
> > again? I think they'll be quite useful as folks start pushing the NOHZ
> > idle times out.
> 
> Absolutely! It is still on my to-do list, but unfortunately, I got busy 
> with a couple other things.
> 
> With regard to the last patch set I submitted for this, Thomas had an 
> issue with one of the patches. I understand the concern, but I am not 
> sure  which would be the preferred way to handle this. See the below thread:
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125062817124381&w=2
> 
> If you or Thomas have any feedback on this, I could re-work the patch 
> against the latest kernel tree.

Ok. I think Thomas is right there, setting the expiration to
max_time_delta makes the most sense. Honestly I suspect we don't ever
hit that case in the current code (no timers for 12 days), so its
probably an untested code path as it stands.

thanks
-john