This is a discussion on Re: New "timeout" api, to replace callout - FreeBSD ; In message: "Poul-Henning Kamp" writes: : In message , Luigi Rizzo writes: : : : >This is why i suggest having a 'scale' that can represent '1 tick' : >(and also don't depend on TIMEOUT_MSEC == 1000 and so on, ...
In message: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
: In message <20071202055031.A8107@xorpc.icir.org>, Luigi Rizzo writes:
: >This is why i suggest having a 'scale' that can represent '1 tick'
: >(and also don't depend on TIMEOUT_MSEC == 1000 and so on, but keep
: >them opaque and require that the client code uses one of the supported
: Using a deadline timer based in the HPET, the timeout can be scheduled
: to any 1/14318181th of a second and there will be no concept of "a
: tick" as we know it now.
: Clients should say how often they want to be called, and they should
: express it in terms of time, not based on some implementation detail
: of a historical implementation of the scheduler.
Yes. I'd definitely like to move to this sort of thing. I missed the
conversion routines in my last email, so ignore that part of things...
Does this mean that you're planning a so-called tickless
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "firstname.lastname@example.org"