From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751000AbWG3CCP (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:02:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751014AbWG3CCO (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:02:14 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.192.82]:34992 "EHLO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751000AbWG3CCO (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:02:14 -0400 Subject: Re: itimer again (Re: [PATCH] RTC: Add mmap method to rtc character driver) From: Nicholas Miell To: Bill Huey 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 In-Reply-To: <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> <20060730013936.GA23571@gnuppy.monkey.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:02:07 -0700 Message-Id: <1154224927.2467.14.camel@entropy> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 (2.6.2-1.fc5.5.0.njm.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2006-07-29 at 18:39 -0700, Bill Huey wrote: > 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. OK, so what does control of a scheduling policy in relation to a scheduling policy mean? > > > 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. > I'm actually interested, and I imagine other people are too. -- Nicholas Miell