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

[Tejun Heo]

On 06/17/2010 01:43 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> 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.

Yeah, right, there are those crazy devices too but I think they would
fall in a single tick any way.  At any rate, let's say I have those
numbers, how would I feed it into c-state selection?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

--
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/