From: Stephen Anthony <stephena@cs.mun.ca>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: What's the timeslice size for kernel 2.6.0-test2, IA32?
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:04:46 -0230
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200308011404.46886.stephena@cs.mun.ca>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1012
Lines: 23

>> I haven't been able to find this information anywhere.  I know HZ was
>> increased to 1000, but was the timeslice decreased to 1 ms (from 10 ms)
>> as well?
>
> Depends on nice of the task. Nice 0 tasks get 102ms.

I don't think I asked the right question :)  If I call usleep(x) or 
nanosleep(x) with kernel 2.4.21, and x < 10, the sleep would still last 
10 ms because of the timeslice.  All sleeps would be a multiple of 10 ms.

If I call usleep(x) or nanosleep(x) in 2.6.0-test2, what 'multiple' can I 
expect?  Maybe I mean granularity instead of timeslice.  Basically, I 
want to know how 'soft' of a real-time system the new kernel is.

It would be great if sleeps were 1ms accurate instead of 10ms.  It would 
make synchronization code a lot easier.

Steve
-
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/