Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 10:11:11 -0600 From: "Weiguang SHI" <weiguang_shi@hotmail.com> To: bright@mu.org, jeff@expertcity.com Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: timing question Message-ID: <F4977bieLYCT4aJ6pkN00000e1b@hotmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> >To: Jeff Behl <jeff@expertcity.com> >CC: "'freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> >Subject: Re: timing question >Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:49:55 -0500 > >* Jeff Behl <jeff@expertcity.com> [010806 12:48] wrote: > > please excuse and direct me to the right place if this isn't the >appropriate > > place to post this sort of question.... > > > > we're looking into moving to freebsd (yea!), but found the following > > problem. It seems that the shortest amount of time the below code will > > sleep for is 20 seconds! any call to nanosleep for 5,10, etc >miliseconds > > returns a 20 ms delay. are we doing something wrong? > >You may have to increase the kernel value for HZ so that you get >more fine grained clock interrupts. I didn't look at the code but if increasing the value of 'hz' will result in more clock-interrupts/sec thus more overhead, wouldn't it be better to auto-adjust the clock-interrupt rate somewhere in the OS to clock-interrupt at big strides in the beginning but at finer-grained interval as the actual timeout event approaches? Weiguang _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F4977bieLYCT4aJ6pkN00000e1b>