Le vendredi 16 juin 2006 à 12:16 -0300, John DeDourek a écrit : > > Callum Lerwick wrote: > > > On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 14:07 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > >>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. > > > > > > Perfect! I know such patches have been floating around for years now, > > (And apparently some platforms have been using them already for a while) > > What's the current holdup? :) > > > My question to the development team is whether ntp clock conditioning is > a consideration or not when evaluating changes to the kernel time keeping > functions. I'd say 90% of the work is related to ntp alone. You can jump to the linux kernel mailing list if you want more info. Without ntp the work would already have been done. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
