From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262024AbVHAHv2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 03:51:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262229AbVHAHv2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 03:51:28 -0400 Received: from postfix4-2.free.fr ([213.228.0.176]:37019 "EHLO postfix4-2.free.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262024AbVHAHv1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2005 03:51:27 -0400 Message-ID: <42EDD473.3010308@free.fr> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 09:51:15 +0200 From: greg User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050322) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Clock resolution / RT preemption Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi folks, I'm looking for a timer resolution lower than 1 ms (and monotonic clock rate) destined to be used with some network code running on x86 platforms. Would you please provide me with informations about how to get/implement this. AFAIK, there's a "high resultion timer" patch hanging around, but there's not much informations with regard to portability (specific hardware requirements ?), scalability, integration with RT patches. I understand the POSIX 1003.1b Clocks and Timers system calls are not fully available within the linux kernel (and libc ?), am I right on that ? One more question : I believe Ingo's preemption patch run timers/interrupt handlers within kernel threads, how should I assign specific priority to address my goals without compromising system stability ?