Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:24:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:23:49 -0500 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:12278 "EHLO av.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:23:11 -0500 Message-ID: <3DD969B6.9D221DB1@mvista.com> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 14:29:10 -0800 From: george anzinger Organization: Monta Vista Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20b i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Dipankar Sarma , Matthew Wilcox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Run timers as softirqs, not tasklets References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1054 Lines: 35 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Dipankar Sarma wrote: > > > I wrote that part of smptimers to run the per-CPU lists from per-CPU > > tasklets while porting Ingo's code to 2.5 and Ingo just included it. At > > that time, it didn't seem necessary to use up a softirq vector when it > > could be easily done using tasklets. > > i think a separate timer softirq is justified, timers are important > enough. > > Ingo > So then, is there any reason to not put them ahead of HI_SOFTIRQ? I.e.: enum { TIMER_SOFTIRQ=0, HI_SOFTIRQ NET_TX_SOFTIRQ, NET_RX_SOFTIRQ, SCSI_SOFTIRQ, -- George Anzinger george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/