Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:07:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:07:08 -0400 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de ([131.188.30.102]:58259 "EHLO faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:07:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 00:46:52 +0200 From: Richard Zidlicky To: george anzinger Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Replace timer_bh with tasklet Message-ID: <20020619004652.D2079@linux-m68k.org> References: <3D0F76E4.AC6EA257@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3D0F76E4.AC6EA257@mvista.com>; from george@mvista.com on Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 11:07:32AM -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 768 Lines: 20 On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 11:07:32AM -0700, george anzinger wrote: > > I reasoned that the timers, unlike most other I/O, directly drive the system. > For example, the time slice is counted down by the timer BH. By pushing the > timer out to ksoftirqd, running at nice 19, you open the door to a compute > bound task running over its time slice (admittedly this should be caught on > the next interrupt). I have had some problems with timers delayed up to 0.06s in 2.4 kernels, could that be this problem? Richard - 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/