Re: [PATCH 09/12] irq: implement IRQ expecting

[Alan Cox]

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:23:27 +0200
Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 06/17/2010 01:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Hmmm.... oh, I see.  Wouldn't it be much better to use moving avg of
> >> IRQ durations instead of letting the driver specify it?  Drivers are
> >> most likely to just hard code it and It's never gonna be accurate.
> > 
> > Right, but that's probably more accurate than the core code heuristics
> > ever will be.
> 
> Eh, not really.  For ATA at least, there will be three different
> classes of devices.  SSDs, hard drives and optical devices

At least four: It may also be battery backed RAM.

Alan


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/