Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] low-latency scheduling patch for 2.4.0
From: george anzinger (george_AT_mvista.com)
Date: Wed Jan 31 2001 - 09:55:46 EET
Joe deBlaquiere wrote:
~snip~
> The locical answer is run with HZ=10000 so you get 100us intervals,
> right ;o).
Lets not assume we need the overhead of HZ=10000 to get 100us
alarm/timer resolution. How about a timer that ticks when we need the
next tick...
On systems with multiple hardware timers you could kick off a
> single event at 200us, couldn't you? I've done that before with the
> extra timer assigned exclusively to a resource.
With the right hardware resource, one high res counter can give you all
the various tick resolutions you need. BTDT on HPRT.
George
It's not a giant time
> slice, but at least you feel like you're allowing something to happen,
> right?
>
>>
>> --
>> dwmw2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 31 2001 - 10:38:59 EET