Re: [RFC] HZ free ntp

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Roman Zippel
Date: Monday, January 1, 2007 - 9:27 am

Hi,

On Wednesday 20 December 2006 02:32, john stultz wrote:


Yes, thanks.
tick_nsec doesn't require special treatment, in the middle term it's obsolete 
anyway, it could be replaced with (current_tick_length() >> 
TICK_LENGTH_SHIFT) and current_tick_length() being inlined.
NTP_INTERVAL_FREQ could be a real variable (so it can be initialized at 
runtime), it's already gone from all important paths.
In the short term I'd prefered a clock would store its frequency instead of 
using NTP_INTERVAL_LENGTH in clocksource_calculate_interval(), so it doesn't 
has to be derived there.

bye, Roman
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC] HZ free ntp, Roman Zippel, (Mon Jan 1, 9:27 am)
Re: [RFC] HZ free ntp, john stultz, (Tue Jan 2, 12:42 pm)
Re: [RFC] HZ free ntp, Roman Zippel, (Sat Jan 6, 9:46 am)