From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423200AbXDXX4N (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:56:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754555AbXDXX4N (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:56:13 -0400 Received: from omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.82.153]:34208 "EHLO omta01ps.mx.bigpond.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754139AbXDXX4M (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:56:12 -0400 Message-ID: <462E990B.6000902@bigpond.net.au> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:55:55 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rogan Dawes CC: Chris Friesen , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Nick Piggin , Gene Heskett , Juliusz Chroboczek , Mike Galbraith , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ck list , Thomas Gleixner , William Lee Irwin III , Andrew Morton , Bill Davidsen , Willy Tarreau , Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44 References: <20070421160008.GA28783@elte.hu> <200704220959.34978.kernel@kolivas.org> <87647oblx5.fsf@pps.jussieu.fr> <20070423013429.GB25162@wotan.suse.de> <20070423191143.GA16849@elte.hu> <20070423203317.GA26668@elte.hu> <462DAC06.9040309@dawes.za.net> <20070424073103.GA29054@elte.hu> <462DBEF6.70205@dawes.za.net> <462E1C2E.30406@nortel.com> <462E1D37.3060008@dawes.za.net> In-Reply-To: <462E1D37.3060008@dawes.za.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at oaamta06ps.mx.bigpond.com from [58.164.138.40] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:56:00 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rogan Dawes wrote: > Chris Friesen wrote: >> Rogan Dawes wrote: >> >>> I guess my point was if we somehow get to an odd number of >>> nanoseconds, we'd end up with rounding errors. I'm not sure if your >>> algorithm will ever allow that. >> >> And Ingo's point was that when it takes thousands of nanoseconds for a >> single context switch, an error of half a nanosecond is down in the >> noise. >> >> Chris > > My concern was that since Ingo said that this is a closed economy, with > a fixed sum/total, if we lose a nanosecond here and there, eventually > we'll lose them all. > > Some folks have uptimes of multiple years. > > Of course, I could (very likely!) be full of it! ;-) And won't be using the any new scheduler on these computers anyhow as that would involve bringing the system down to install the new kernel. :-) Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce