[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070425092919.GB498@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 11:29:19 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Rogan Dawes <lists@...es.za.net>
Cc: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>,
Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@....jussieu.fr>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
* Rogan Dawes <lists@...es.za.net> wrote:
> My concern was that since Ingo said that this is a closed economy,
> with a fixed sum/total, if we lose a nanosecond here and there,
> eventually we'll lose them all.
it's not a closed economy - the CPU constantly produces a resource: "CPU
cycles to be spent", and tasks constantly consume that resource. So in
that sense small inaccuracies are not a huge issue. But you are correct
that each and every such inaccuracy has to be justified. For example
larger inaccuracies on the order of SCHED_LOAD_SCALE are a problem
because they can indeed sum up, and i fixed up a couple of such
inaccuracies in -v6-to-be.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists