Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 21:07:29 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why was the timehands_count sysctl added? Message-ID: <202110092107.199L7T4j059128@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfr7_jb07%2BAft_uo2F8L9hDr9iABaDkANioJhi-kQXQeoQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <2d1d2a6d-ec6b-7f52-8af3-09a833c52820@embedded-brains.de> <YWHzoTpcZTQcHVUw@kib.kiev.ua> <CANCZdfr7_jb07%2BAft_uo2F8L9hDr9iABaDkANioJhi-kQXQeoQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-------- Warner Losh writes: > > To allow for experimentation, and to satisfy some requests where people > > wanted to have more that 2 timehands. > > When would someone want that? What's the use case? The reason there were originally 10 timehands was that latency in the early SMP kernels was ... ehh ... variable ... and some of the time-counters rolled over quite fast compared to that. I really hope no relevant current hardware has that problem. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202110092107.199L7T4j059128>