Hmm, I don't know if this is of interest to anyone here: ( afaiu there is developement for Linux to loose the regular timertick )
uwe from lwn.net: http://lwn.net/Articles/213878/ Patch: HZ free ntp On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 15:33 +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > i disagree with you and it's pretty low-impact anyway. There's still > > quite many HZ/tick assumptions all around the time code (NTP being one > > example), we'll deal with those via other patches. > > Why do you pick on the NTP code? That's actually one of the places where > assumptions about HZ are largely gone. NTP state is updated incrementally > and this won't change, but the update frequency can now be easily > disconnected from HZ. Hey Roman, Here's my rough first attempt at doing so. I'd not call it easy, but maybe you have some suggestions for a simpler way? Basically INTERVAL_LENGTH_NSEC defines the NTP interval length that the time code will use to accumulate with. In this patch I've pushed it out to a full second, but it could be set via config (NSEC_PER_SEC/HZ for regular systems, something larger for systems using dynticks). Thoughts? -john _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
