Re: Help with the high res timers

[George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>]

Chris Friesen wrote:
> George Anzinger wrote:
> 
>> The, I think, elegant solution to the timer storm problem is to not 
>> restart the timer until the user picks up the prior expiration.  This 
>> dynamically adjusts the timer response to the amount of machine 
>> available at the time.
> 
> 
> The disadvantage is that you then lose accuracy since each timer 
> interval is increased by some random amount based on system scheduling. 
>  What about some kind of ulimit-type thing to specify the minimum 
> recurring interval that can be specified?  If root so specifies, you 
> could have 1usec interval timers and the system would hang.  This is 
> conceptually no different than busy-looping in a SCHED_FIFO task.

The standard comes to the rescue here.  The standard defines timer_getoverrun() 
which returns the number of additional timeouts you _would_ have seen if you had 
been fast enough.

I tried a limit thing.  It is MUCH too fragile for the real world.
> 
-- 
George Anzinger   george@mvista.com
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/