From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>
Cc: Ingo Adlung <Ingo.Adlung@t-online.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] High-res-timers part 2 (x86 platform code) take 5.1
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:17:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021015001747.A661@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021014091855.A4197@ucw.cz>
Hi!
> > >>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.
>
> Not speaking for a major distro, just for me writing HPET (high
> performance event timer ...) support for x86-64 (and it happens to exist
> on ia64 as well, and possibly might be in new Intel P4 chipsets, too).
>
> It's a very nice piece of hardware that allows very fine granularity
> aperiodic interrupts (in each interrupt you set when the next one will
> happen), without much overhead.
I believe the problem is like this: assume you have three timers,
10msec polling of mouse, 30msec keyboard autorepeat and 50msec cursor
blinking. With current approach, you get
10msec userland runs
<enter kernel>
<process mouse>
<process keyboard>
<process cursor>
<exit kernel>
With hires timers, you get:
3msec userland runs
<enter kernel>
<process mouse>
<exit kernel>
2msec userland runs
<enter kernel>
<process keyboard>
<exit kernel>
...
which is not so efficient. I guess rounding could be implemented to
preserve this "do-all-together" ability?
Pavel
--
When do you have heart between your knees?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-15 6:55 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
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 [this message]
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
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=20021015001747.A661@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=Ingo.Adlung@t-online.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=vojtech@suse.cz \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).