From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750958AbWG3BkF (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:40:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750997AbWG3BkF (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:40:05 -0400 Received: from adsl-69-232-92-238.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net ([69.232.92.238]:32135 "EHLO gnuppy.monkey.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750958AbWG3BkE (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:40:04 -0400 Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:39:36 -0700 To: Nicholas Miell Cc: Edgar Toernig , Neil Horman , Jim Gettys , "H. Peter Anvin" , Dave Airlie , Segher Boessenkool , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.zummo@towertech.it, jg@freedesktop.org, Keith Packard , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , "Bill Huey (hui)" Subject: Re: itimer again (Re: [PATCH] RTC: Add mmap method to rtc character driver) Message-ID: <20060730013936.GA23571@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <44C68AA8.6080702@zytor.com> <1153863542.1230.41.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060729042820.GA16133@gnuppy.monkey.org> <20060729125427.GA6669@localhost.localdomain> <20060729204107.GA20890@gnuppy.monkey.org> <20060729234948.0768dbf4.froese@gmx.de> <20060729225138.GA22390@gnuppy.monkey.org> <1154216151.2467.5.camel@entropy> <20060730010020.GA23288@gnuppy.monkey.org> <1154222579.2467.12.camel@entropy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1154222579.2467.12.camel@entropy> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 From: Bill Huey (hui) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 06:22:59PM -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote: > On Sat, 2006-07-29 at 18:00 -0700, Bill Huey wrote: > > Think edge triggered verse level triggered. Event interfaces in the Linux > > kernel are sort of just that, edge triggered events. What RT folks generally > > want is control over scheduling policies over a particular time period in > > relation to a scheduling policy. A general kernel event interface isn't > ^ Did you mean to say timer here? No, I really ment scheduling. > > going to cut it for those purpose and wasn't design to deal with those cases > > in the first place. > > So you're asking for an automatic (perhaps temporary) change in > scheduling policy when a particular timer expires (or perhaps on > occurrence of other types of events)? > I think Windows automatically boosts the priority of a thread when it > delivers an I/O completion notification, and I'm pretty sure that > Microsoft has a patent related to that. Na, different problem altogether. It's better that'd shut up. bill