Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-16 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > /* > * Timeouts for various operations: > */ > #define WAIT_DRQ(5*HZ/100) /* 50msec - spec allows up to 20ms */ > #ifdef CONFIG_APM > #define WAIT_READY (5*HZ) /* 5sec - some laptops are very slow */ Broken broken broken. CONFIG_APM has *nothing* to do with mac

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-15 Thread george anzinger
Roger Larsson wrote: > > On Thursday 12 April 2001 23:52, Andre Hedrick wrote: > > Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > > > > I do not care but your drives/floppy/tapes/cdroms/cdrws do: > > > > /* > > * Timeout

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-14 Thread Roger Larsson
On Thursday 12 April 2001 23:52, Andre Hedrick wrote: > Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > > I do not care but your drives/floppy/tapes/cdroms/cdrws do: > > /* > * Timeouts for various operations: > */ > #defin

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-14 Thread Rogier Wolff
Andre Hedrick wrote: > > Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > > I do not care but your drives/floppy/tapes/cdroms/cdrws do: > > /* > * Timeouts for various operations: > */ > #define WAIT_DRQ(5*HZ/100)

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread george anzinger
Mark Salisbury wrote: > > > I think it makes the most sense to keep jiffie as a simple unsigned > > int. If we leave drivers, and other code as is they can deal with > > single word (32 bit) values and get reasonable results. If we make HZ > > too high (say 10,000 to get micro second resolution

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread Michael Raymond
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 08:20:56AM -0400, Mark Salisbury wrote: > inner loop, i.e. interrupt timer code should never have to convert from some > real time value into number of decrementer ticks in order to set up the next > interrupt as that requires devides (and 64 bit ones at that) in a tickless

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread Alan Cox
> Great HZ always defines units of jiffies, but that is worthless if there > is not a ruleset that tells me a value to divide by to return it to a > specific quantity of time. HZ obviously. Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message t

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread Mark Salisbury
> I think it makes the most sense to keep jiffie as a simple unsigned > int. If we leave drivers, and other code as is they can deal with > single word (32 bit) values and get reasonable results. If we make HZ > too high (say 10,000 to get micro second resolution) we will start > limiting the ma

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread David Schleef
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 09:04:28PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > > > Actually we could do the same thing they did for errno, i.e. > > > > #define jiffies get_jiffies() > > extern unsigned get_jiffies(void); > > > No, not really. HZ still defines th

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread george anzinger
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote: > > Andre Hedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > > > > > Actually we could do the same thing they did for errno, i.e. > > > > > > #define jiffies get_jiffies() > > > extern unsigned get_jiffies(void); > > > > > No, not r

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-13 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andre Hedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > > > Actually we could do the same thing they did for errno, i.e. > > > > #define jiffies get_jiffies() > > extern unsigned get_jiffies(void); > > > No, not really. HZ still defines the units of jiffies a

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-12 Thread Andre Hedrick
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote: > Actually we could do the same thing they did for errno, i.e. > > #define jiffies get_jiffies() > extern unsigned get_jiffies(void); > No, not really. HZ still defines the units of jiffies and most all the > timing is still related to it. Its just

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-12 Thread george anzinger
Andre Hedrick wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > > > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > > > > > #define WAIT_MIN_SLEEP (2*HZ/100) /* 20msec - minimum sleep time */ > > > > > > Give me

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-12 Thread Andre Hedrick
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > > > #define WAIT_MIN_SLEEP (2*HZ/100) /* 20msec - minimum sleep time */ > > > > Give me something for HZ or a rule for gettin

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-12 Thread Alan Cox
> Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical > timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? > #define WAIT_MIN_SLEEP (2*HZ/100) /* 20msec - minimum sleep time */ > > Give me something for HZ or a rule for getting a known base so I can have > your storage work a

Re: Linux-Kernel Archive: No 100 HZ timer !

2001-04-12 Thread Andre Hedrick
Okay but what will be used for a base for hardware that has critical timing issues due to the rules of the hardware? I do not care but your drives/floppy/tapes/cdroms/cdrws do: /* * Timeouts for various operations: */ #define WAIT_DRQ(5*HZ/100) /* 50msec - spec allows up to 20ms