Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932362AbVIESGv (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 14:06:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932369AbVIESGv (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 14:06:51 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:52475 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932362AbVIESGu (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 14:06:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 11:06:43 -0700 From: Nishanth Aravamudan To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri Cc: Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, ck list Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dynticks - implement no idle hz for x86 Message-ID: <20050905180643.GA17585@us.ibm.com> References: <20050831165843.GA4974@in.ibm.com> <200509031801.09069.kernel@kolivas.org> <20050903090650.B26998@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <200509031814.49666.kernel@kolivas.org> <20050904201054.GA4495@us.ibm.com> <20050905070053.GA7329@in.ibm.com> <20050905084425.B24051@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20050905170424.GK25856@us.ibm.com> <20050905172714.GB9132@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050905172714.GB9132@in.ibm.com> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.13 (i686) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1163 Lines: 28 On 05.09.2005 [22:57:14 +0530], Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 10:04:24AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > However, we could change "handler" to be a function pointer which > > > returns the number of missed ticks instead, and then updates the > > > kernels time and tick keeping. That would probably be more efficient. > > > > Yes, I think > > > > unsigned long (*recover_time)(int, void *, struct pt_regs *); > > > > or something similar (not sure about the params), might be more > > appropriate. > > What would this be for x86? This could be cur_timer->mark_offset() > itself for now i think, until John's TOD comes along. Yes, exactly, I was planning on hooking into the timer_opts for x86, until John's timesource rework occured, which will keep the code pretty similar across the change, but helps keep it clear *why* we are calling mark_offset(), at least to me. Thanks, Nish - 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/