Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750879AbWHBMuf (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:50:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750882AbWHBMuf (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:50:35 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]:12525 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750874AbWHBMue (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:50:34 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=googlemail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=XibSLmmWbB4oHtbrSofoDbXdmXw/JYP/XFPAihltqK5f0Xzvk+AgHSxUogfSI8n95alxhWarXbdQW1AqqbV38tdE+8QGnYUqKAxmMUjdYZgqQ7NDDJ33O2628zu5E6JI1bjYYVzzPiEzt8JKFqNix4QLX8hvDBPV3qJQL6jFW2g= Message-ID: <6e0cfd1d0608020550k7ae2c44dg94afbe56d66b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 14:50:32 +0200 From: "Martin Schwidefsky" To: "Atsushi Nemoto" Subject: Re: [PATCH] simplify update_times (avoid jiffies/jiffies_64 aliasing problem) Cc: johnstul@us.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org, zippel@linux-m68k.org, clameter@engr.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, ak@muc.de In-Reply-To: <20060801.234422.25910237.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060305.021542.126141997.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20060730.235403.108306254.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <6e0cfd1d0607310336o355693a5l939db098b9210d81@mail.gmail.com> <20060801.234422.25910237.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 990 Lines: 23 On 8/1/06, Atsushi Nemoto wrote: > > I think that this is going into the wrong direction. There are a > > number of architectures that call do_timer(regs) in a while loop. It > > would be much nicer if do_timer would get the number of passed ticks > > as an argument. And the "regs" argument to do_timer is just useless. > > But normally do_timer() is called just once, isn't it? These loops > are just for lost ticks, which would be rarely happened. So I think > tunning for usual case is better. If you switch of the hz timer in idle you'll get lots of lost ticks. And if you are running a virtualized system you can loose you cpu for some ticks as well. Pass the number of ticks to do_timer. -- blue skies, Martin - 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/