[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708030041021.1817@scrub.home>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 01:23:04 +0200 (CEST)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFS review
Hi,
On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So I think it would be entirely appropriate to
>
> - do something that *approximates* microseconds.
>
> Using microseconds instead of nanoseconds would likely allow us to do
> 32-bit arithmetic in more areas, without any real overflow.
The basic problem is that one needs a number of bits (at least 16) for
normalization, which limits the time range one can work with. This means
that 32 bit leaves only room for 1 millisecond resolution, the remainder
could maybe saved and reused later.
So AFAICT using micro- or nanosecond resolution doesn't make much
computational difference.
bye, Roman
-
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