:)
> Note that RTC interrupts are just as inaccurate for user space
> apps than 8253-based accurate timers -- the scheduling overhead
> and lack of guarantee is still present.
- RTC interrupts can be delivered on any 'wanted' time,
not just on 10ms marks
- the lack of guarantee isn't that bad for 99% of applications
(multimedia and related stuff)
- using a decent timer will improve multimedia performance
- having a decent timer will/might allow us to better pinpoint
the cause of the lack of guarantee
- the scheduling overhead is very small already
Maybe we want a special 'multimedia' scheduling mode with these
properties:
- able to ask for rescheduling on RTC interrupts
- CPU time is twice as expensive
- priority is higher, but the process gets less CPU to hog
This way, multimedia programmers are encouraged to code
their program with one 'worker' thread and one 'output'
thread -- with some buffering in between to catch most
I/O delays etc...
For real RT or low-latency work, you will need to work
on an unloaded computer anyway.
Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ |
| Linux Memory Management site: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/ |
| Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/