Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Apr 2001 23:00:41 -0500 (CDT) | From | Bret Indrelee <> | Subject | Re: No 100 HZ timer! |
| |
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > Bret Indrelee wrote: > > > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > > > Bret Indrelee wrote: > > > > Keep all timers in a sorted double-linked list. Do the insert > > > > intelligently, adding it from the back or front of the list depending on > > > > where it is in relation to existing entries. > > > > > > I think this is too slow, especially for a busy system, but there are > > > solutions... > > > > It is better than the current solution. > > Uh, where are we talking about. The current time list insert is real > close to O(1) and never more than O(5).
I don't like the cost of the cascades every (as I recall) 256 interrupts. This is more work than is done in the rest of the interrupt processing, happens during the tick interrupt, and results in a rebuild of much of the table.
-Bret
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bret Indrelee | Sometimes, to be deep, we must act shallow! bret@io.com | -Riff in The Quatrix
- 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/
| |