Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 1 Sep 2010 12:05:34 +0200
From:      Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@googlemail.com>
To:        Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: One-shot-oriented event timers management
Message-ID:  <20100901120534.1eb3db9b@ernst.jennejohn.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C7D73C8.5050205@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4C7A5C28.1090904@FreeBSD.org> <20100830110932.23425932@ernst.jennejohn.org> <4C7B82EA.2040104@FreeBSD.org> <20100830121148.11926306@ernst.jennejohn.org> <4C7D73C8.5050205@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 00:27:36 +0300
Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 13:07:38 +0300
> > Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >> Yes, as I have said, at this moment empty ticks skipped only while CPU
> >> is in C2/C3 states. In C1 state there is no way to handle lost events on
> >> wake up. While it may be not very dangerous, it is not very good.
> >>
> > Too bad.  I'd say that systems which are limited to C1 don't benefit
> > much (or not at all) from your changes.
> 
> I've solved it! :)
> 

Yup, this definitely reduces the number of inerrupts on my C1-only
system :)

Now I'm seeing on the order of 100 to 200 interrupts/s instead of around
2300.

I'll run this new kernel some more and see how stable it is.

Thanks, mav!

--
Gary Jennejohn



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100901120534.1eb3db9b>