From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Alexander Nyberg <alexn@telia.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] adjust x86-64 watchdog tick calculation
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 18:56:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1116024993.6380.47.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050513225127.GB2016@elf.ucw.cz>
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 00:51 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > Because it kills machine when interrupt latency gets too high?
> > > > > Like reading battery status using i2c...
> > > >
> > > > That's a bug in the I2C reader then. Don't shot the messenger for bad news.
> > >
> > > Disagreed.
> > >
> > > Linux is not real time OS. Perhaps some real-time constraints "may not
> > > spend > 100msec with interrupts disabled" would be healthy
> > ^^^^
> > You mean "microseconds", right? 100ms will be perceived by the user as,
> > well, their machine freezing for 100ms...
>
> I did mean miliseconds. IIRC current watchdog is at one second and it
> still triggers even in cases when operation just takes too long.
I thought there was an understanding that 1 ms would be the target for
desktop responsiveness. So yes, disabling interrupts for more than 1ms
is considered a bug.
Why do you need to disable interrupts for 100ms to read the battery
status exactly?
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-13 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-12 8:27 [PATCH] adjust x86-64 watchdog tick calculation Jan Beulich
2005-05-12 10:00 ` Alexander Nyberg
2005-05-12 11:46 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-05-12 14:29 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-13 11:30 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-13 19:52 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-13 21:27 ` Lee Revell
2005-05-13 22:51 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-13 22:56 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2005-05-13 23:21 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-13 23:29 ` Dave Jones
2005-05-15 10:52 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-15 10:36 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-15 10:51 ` Pavel Machek
2005-05-15 10:54 ` Andi Kleen
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=1116024993.6380.47.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=alexn@telia.com \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@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).