From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com>
To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Dynamic Tick and Deferrable Timer Support
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:29:11 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4981D957.8040409@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7E82351C108FA840AB1866AC776AEC464723835C@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> max_delta would depend on the timer in the platform. With HPET this
> should be much larger than 2.15 secs.
So I agree that the HPET hardware in newer devices themselves would
allow longer sleep periods. However, this is not the problem I was raising.
The problem is that the dynamic tick uses a 32-bit variable,
max_delta_ns, to define that max sleep time of a device in nanoseconds.
The maximum value that this variable can be assigned is LONG_MAX or
0x7fffffff nanoseconds (see function clockevent_delta2ns). The value
0x7fffffff nanoseconds equates to ~2.15 seconds. Hence, without
increasing the dynamic range of max_delta_ns (ie. make this a 64-bit
integer) or change the base of this variable from nanoseconds to
milliseconds, I don't see how the device will ever sleep for longer than
~2.15 seconds.
I have spent several weeks trying to suppress kernel timers using the
deferred timers and lengthen the sleep time. I am now able to get the
device to sleep for minutes but I found that max_delta_ns is a limiting
factor. I will be surprised if you can sleep for longer than ~2.15
seconds with the current implementation.
Let me know if this makes sense.
> Ok. Thinking about it a bit more, I think we can push this
> patch along.
> Thomas/Andrew, can one of you pick up this patch..
Great thanks.
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-29 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-14 20:03 [RFC] Dynamic Tick and Deferrable Timer Support Hunter, Jon
2009-01-15 6:16 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-26 18:23 ` Hunter, Jon
2009-01-26 19:48 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-01-26 21:41 ` Hunter, Jon
2009-01-27 18:36 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-01-27 18:45 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-01-29 16:29 ` Jon Hunter [this message]
2009-01-29 17:36 ` john stultz
2009-01-30 19:04 ` Jon Hunter
2009-01-30 20:29 ` john stultz
2009-02-07 9:20 ` Pavel Machek
2009-02-07 9:20 ` Pavel Machek
2009-02-09 19:10 ` John Stultz
2009-04-08 19:20 ` Hunter, Jon
2009-04-08 22:52 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-09 15:02 ` Jon Hunter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4981D957.8040409@ti.com \
--to=jon-hunter@ti.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.