public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] High-res-timers part 2 (x86 platform code) take 5.1
Date: 10 Oct 2002 09:03:06 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m14rbunxp1.fsf@frodo.biederman.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3DA4BECB.9C7D6119@mvista.com>

george anzinger <george@mvista.com> writes:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, george anzinger wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch, in conjunction with the "core" high-res-timers
> > > patch implements high resolution timers on the i386
> > > platforms.
> > 
> > I really don't get the notion of partial ticks, and quite frankly, this
> > isn't going into my tree until some major distribution kicks me in the
> > head and explains to me why the hell we have partial ticks instead of just
> > making the ticks shorter.
> > 
> Well, the notion is to provide timers that have resolution
> down into the micro seconds.  Since this take a bit more
> overhead, we just set up an interrupt on an as needed
> basis.  This is why we define both a high res and a low res
> clock.  Timers on the low res clock will always use the 1/HZ
> tick to drive them and thus do not introduce any additional
> overhead.  If this is all that is needed the configure
> option can be left off and only these timers will be
> available.
> 
> On the other hand, if a user requires better resolution,
> s/he just turns on the high-res option and incures the
> overhead only when it is used and then only at timer expire
> time.  Note that the only way to access a high-res timer is
> via the POSIX clocks and timers API.  They are not available
> to select or any other system call.
> 
> Making ticks shorter causes extra overhead ALL the time,
> even when it is not needed.  Higher resolution is not free
> in any case, but it is much closer to free with this patch
> than by increasing HZ (which, of course, can still be
> done).  Overhead wise and resolution wise, for timers, we
> would be better off with a 1/HZ tick and the "on demand"
> high-res interrupts this patch introduces.

???  The issue of ticks is separate from the issue of how often
timer interrupts fire.  Ticks just becomes the maximum resolution
you can support/express.

If it makes sense to have two maximum tick resolutions.  The normal
application maximum tick rate and the special task maximum tick
rate it is probably worth making this only available as a capability
or an rlimit.

Eric


  reply	other threads:[~2002-10-10 14:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-09 22:47 [PATCH 2/3] High-res-timers part 2 (x86 platform code) take 5.1 george anzinger
2002-10-09 23:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-09 23:42   ` george anzinger
2002-10-10 15:03     ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2002-10-10 15:45       ` george anzinger
2002-10-10 15:54     ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-10-10 16:24       ` george anzinger
2002-10-10 17:04         ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-10-10 17:47           ` george anzinger
2002-10-13 10:46   ` Ingo Adlung
2002-10-14  7:18     ` Vojtech Pavlik
2002-10-14 22:17       ` Pavel Machek
2002-10-15  7:13         ` Vojtech Pavlik
2002-10-15 21:45           ` george anzinger
2002-10-17 21:54   ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-17 22:11     ` Robert Love
2002-10-18 13:11     ` mbs
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-10  0:50 Dan Kegel
2002-10-10  1:33 ` Ben Greear
2002-10-10  3:55 ` Jeff Dike
2002-10-10  3:32   ` Dan Kegel
2002-10-10 12:34 ` mbs
2002-10-12 22:03 Jim Houston
2002-10-14  6:50 ` Ulrich Windl
2002-10-15 22:03   ` george anzinger
2002-10-19  1:02 Brad Bozarth

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=m14rbunxp1.fsf@frodo.biederman.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=george@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox