Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:30:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:30:49 -0400 Received: from twilight.cs.hut.fi ([130.233.40.5]:3187 "EHLO twilight.cs.hut.fi") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:30:38 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 16:30:30 +0300 From: Ville Herva To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Fabio Riccardi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: X15 alpha release: as fast as TUX but in user space Message-ID: <20010428163030.D3682@niksula.cs.hut.fi> In-Reply-To: <20010428161502.I3529@niksula.cs.hut.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from mingo@elte.hu on Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 03:24:25PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 03:24:25PM +0200, you [Ingo Molnar] claimed: > > On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, Ville Herva wrote: > > > Uhh, perhaps I'm stupid, but why not cache the date field and update > > the field once a five seconds? Or even once a second? > > perhaps the best way would be to do this updating in the sending code > itself. > > first there would be a 'current time thread', which updates a global > shared variable that shows the current time. (ie. no extra system-call is > needed to access current time.) If the header-sending code detects that > current time is not equal to the timestamp stored in the header itself, > then the header is reconstructed. Pretty simple. Yes, that's vaguely resembles what I had in mind. Of course I had no idea about the data structures Tux or X15 use internally, so I couldn't think it too thoroughly. -- v -- v@iki.fi - 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/