On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:30:34 +0100 Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 20:20 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > One way to improve granularity, and eliminate the possibility of > > > p->last_run being > rq->timestamp_tast_tick, and thereby short > > > circuiting the evaluation of cache_hot_time, is to cache the last > > > return of sched_clock() at both tick and sched times, and use that > > > value as our reference instead of the absolute time of the tick. It > > > won't totally eliminate skew, but it moves the reference point closer > > > to the current time on the remote cpu. > > > > > > Looking for a good place to do this, I chose update_cpu_clock(). > > > > looks good to me - thus we will update the timestamp not only in the > > timer tick, but also upon every context-switch (when we acquire > > sched_clock() value anyway). Lets try this in -mm? > > > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Then it needs a blame line. > > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > And a changelog, then we're all set! Oh. And a patch, too. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
