On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 15:50 +0100, stephane eranian wrote:
> Peter,
>
> > On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
> > > the high resolution timers as the interface to allow
Peter,
> On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
> > the high resolution timers as the interface to allow timeout-based
> > event set multiplexing. This works around the problems I had
Peter,
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution timers as the interface to allow timeout-based
event set multiplexing. This works around the problems I had with
On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 15:50 +0100, stephane eranian wrote:
Peter,
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution timers as the interface to allow timeout-based
On Friday 18 January 2008 17:33, stephane eranian wrote:
> Nick,
> > It is arch specific. If an architecture wants interrupts on during
> > context switch, or runqueue unlocked, then they set it (btw
> > INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW also implies UNLOCKED_CTXSW).
>
> Yes , I noticed that. I am only
On Friday 18 January 2008 17:33, stephane eranian wrote:
Nick,
It is arch specific. If an architecture wants interrupts on during
context switch, or runqueue unlocked, then they set it (btw
INTERRUPTS_ON_CTXSW also implies UNLOCKED_CTXSW).
Yes , I noticed that. I am only interested in
Nick,
On Jan 18, 2008 3:07 AM, Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Friday 18 January 2008 00:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > [ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
> > helpful :-) ]
> >
> > On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
On Friday 18 January 2008 00:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> [ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
> helpful :-) ]
>
> On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
> > the high
[ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
helpful :-) ]
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
> the high resolution timers as the interface to allow timeout-based
> event set
[ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
helpful :-) ]
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution timers as the interface to allow timeout-based
event set
On Friday 18 January 2008 00:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
helpful :-) ]
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution
Nick,
On Jan 18, 2008 3:07 AM, Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 18 January 2008 00:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[ At the very least CC'ing the scheduler maintainer would be
helpful :-) ]
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 16:29 -0800, stephane eranian wrote:
Hello,
As suggested
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution
timers as the interface to allow timeout-based event set multiplexing.
This works around
the problems I had with tickless-enabled kernels.
Multiplexing is supported in per-thread as well. In that case,
Hello,
As suggested by people on this list, I have changed perfmon2 to use
the high resolution
timers as the interface to allow timeout-based event set multiplexing.
This works around
the problems I had with tickless-enabled kernels.
Multiplexing is supported in per-thread as well. In that case,
14 matches
Mail list logo
