Re: Kernel timers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 02:32 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 23:33 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Tickless operation. We need to abandon the timer tick.
> 
> Interesting, what would this mean for low latency operation?

It would mean that the resistance to switching to 1000HZ gets massively
reduced.

Basically, the current implementation stops the timer tick when the
machine is _idle_. This means that we're not waking the machine up every
1ms and wasting power, and that was the main reason we didn't want
HZ=1000 in the past.

-- 
dwmw2

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux