On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Vitja Makarov <vitja.makarov_at_gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Vitja Makarov <vitja.makarov_at_gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2013/8/23 Davide Italiano <davide_at_freebsd.org>: >>> >>> I think that for socket's timeouts it's ok to have a HZ-precision. It >>> would be much more important to implement high-precision timeouts for >>> select() and friends, if it's not done yet (sorry I'm running 9.1). >>> >> >> JFYI, select()/usleep()/etc... are all fine grained right now in HEAD. >> > > That's cool! Does that mean that FreeBSD 10 would be a tickless system? > > -- > vitja. FreeBSD will have a tickless callout(9) subsystem. There are still some kernel subsystems that depends on hardclock() even if the long term goal is that of moving away from it (when/if possible). A notable example is SCHED_ULE code which depends on hardclock() (sched_tick()) but it could be optimized to skip some calls even though CPU is active. -- Davide "There are no solved problems; there are only problems that are more or less solved" -- Henri PoincareReceived on Sun Sep 01 2013 - 21:45:50 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:41 UTC