Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:02:29 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] Add do_not_call_when_idle option to timer and workqueue |
| |
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:13:24 -0800 Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:11:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:45 -0800 > > Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > struct timer_list { > > > struct list_head entry; > > > unsigned long expires; > > > @@ -16,6 +18,7 @@ > > > unsigned long data; > > > > > > struct tvec_t_base_s *base; > > > + int flags; > > > #ifdef CONFIG_TIMER_STATS > > > > Adding a new field to the timer_list is somewhat of a hit - this is going > > to make an awful lot of data structures a bit larger. Some of which we > > allocate a large number of. > > > > I think we could justfy getting nasty and using the LSB of > > timer_list.function for this.. > > That is a clever idea... Is that going to work in all architectures with all > compiler flags?
Don't know. Possibly not. Other options are list.next, list.prev and base. None of them are pleasant. - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |