Re: preempt-timing-2.6.8-rc1

Nick Piggin
2004-07-13T13:10:17Z

William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>>>AFAICT this is nothing more than rounding up.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:57:54PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>But you want to round down by definition of preempt_thresh, don't you?
>>preempt_thresh = 1ms = 1000000us
>>ie. warn me if the lock hold goes _to or above_ 1000000us
>
>
> The semantics I implemented are warning for strictly above the
> preempt_thresh. Whether those semantics are ideal is irrelevant; it's
> faithful to those semantics.

You are right - I misread it, sorry.

> Given that people are asking for sub-
> millisecond latencies, maybe I should increase the precision.
>

Would soon be useful I think.