From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751398AbVH2WmO (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:42:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751397AbVH2WmO (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:42:14 -0400 Received: from zctfs063.nortelnetworks.com ([47.164.128.120]:30615 "EHLO zctfs063.nortelnetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751398AbVH2WmO (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:42:14 -0400 Message-ID: <43138F3B.7010704@nortel.com> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:42:03 -0600 From: "Christopher Friesen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lee Revell CC: linux-kernel , Con Kolivas Subject: Re: Dynamic tick for 2.6.14 - what's the plan? References: <1125354385.4598.79.camel@mindpipe> In-Reply-To: <1125354385.4598.79.camel@mindpipe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2005 22:42:05.0145 (UTC) FILETIME=[E141FC90:01C5ACEA] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee Revell wrote: > The controversy over the introduction of CONFIG_HZ demonstrated the > urgency of getting a dynamic tick solution merged before 2.6.14. > > Anyone care to give a status report? Con, do you feel that the last > version you posted is ready to go in? Last time I got interested in this, the management of the event queues was still a fairly major performance hit. Has this overhead been brought down to reasonable levels? Chris