Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:29:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:28:50 -0500 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:36615 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:28:38 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 20:28:29 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Davidsen To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable In-Reply-To: <20020109115859.C4902@borg.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Kent Borg wrote: > How does all this fit into doing a tick-less kernel? > > There is something appealing about doing stuff only when there is > stuff to do, like: respond to input, handle some device that becomes > ready, or let another process run for a while. Didn't IBM do some > nice work on this for Linux? (*Was* it nice work?) I was under the > impression that the current kernel isn't that far from being tickless. > > A tickless kernel would be wonderful for battery powered devices that > could literally shut off when there be nothing to do, and it seems it > would (trivially?) help performance on high end power hogs too. > > Why do we have regular HZ ticks? (Other than I think I remember Linus > saying that he likes them.) Feel free to quantify the savings over the current setup with max power saving enabled in the kernel. I just don't see how "wonderful" it would be, given that an idle system currently uses very little battery if you setup the options to save power. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - 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/