From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: vikram186@gmail.com (Vikram Narayanan)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 21:50:35 +0530
Subject: Enabling tickless kernel feature in ARM
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikUY+wyUvKsTmR5aEL2DowJjiWP8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim7vocES5ret7cUd9cdsnDbG71x=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinyb+_wpPWVgtdRwYT8nr3W7fM+ng@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfUvnrb9AhwiVfJ3vo7NfhBJQz5Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikUQ-=6FPkaryjQz1fMWksA-gCuDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikTtk4_nzx4QYAVz9KSL8KzL_mB9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=hsmV5wfTeLPVXCaXqbWMvJB57nw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimJvpYmBQMUeh8jG=z+s-H0+ndoKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikUY+wyUvKsTmR5aEL2DowJjiWP8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikPpbw34-FYF+vUwrUREmDx7mFihQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Mulyadi Santosa
<mulyadi.santosa@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28/04/2011, Vikram Narayanan <vikram186@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am planning to have a tick of 10ms. i.e the HZ value as 100. Will
>> that be good enough?
>
> Sorry, you misunderstood me. What I meant was "how long it takes to
> reprogram the timer, so it ready to deliver another interupt". This is
> based on my rough info that some timers are quick to be reprogrammed,
> some are slow...the rest are damn slow. And since we deal with
> uncertainty (timers could be needed at any point), the fastest one is
> the best bet.
>
> Hopefully I explain it clearly now...
Yeah. Actually I didn't measure the timer reprogramming latency yet.
But I think it will be quite good. My assumption may go wrong.
Are there any other considerations to take care while implementing the
clocksource/clockevents?

Thanks,
Vikram
>
> --
> regards,
>
> Mulyadi Santosa
> Freelance Linux trainer and consultant
>
> blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com
> training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com
>