Re: No 100 HZ timer !

Mark Salisbury
2001-04-10T12:17:59Z

which kind of U/K accaounting are you referring to?

are you referring to global changes in world time? are you referring to time
used by a process?

I think the reduction of clock interrupts by a factor of 10 would buy us some
performance margin that could be traded for a slightly more complex handler.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 02:19:28PM -0400, Mark Salisbury wrote:
> > this is one of linux biggest weaknesses. the fixed interval timer is a
> > throwback. it should be replaced with a variable interval timer with interrupts
> > on demand for any system with a cpu sane/modern enough to have an on-chip
> > interrupting decrementer. (i.e just about any modern chip)
>
> Just how would you do kernel/user CPU time accounting then ? It's currently done
> on every timer tick, and doing it less often would make it useless.
>
>
> -Andi
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
/*------------------------------------------------**
** Mark Salisbury | Mercury Computer Systems **
** mbs@mc.com | System OS - Kernel Team **
**------------------------------------------------**
** I will be riding in the Multiple Sclerosis **
** Great Mass Getaway, a 150 mile bike ride from **
** Boston to Provincetown. Last year I raised **
** over $1200. This year I would like to beat **
** that. If you would like to contribute, **
** please contact me. **
**------------------------------------------------*/