Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1161116 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-06-09 10:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-06-09 10:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [patch 2/7] timer: Remove FIFO guarantee Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-06-09 10:10 +0200
| From | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-09 10:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [patch 2/7] timer: Remove FIFO guarantee |
| Message-ID | <pzmLF-Be-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, George Spelvin wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > After thinking more about it, I'm even more sure that any code which > > relies on the FIFO "guarantee" is broken today. > > Indeed, I am completely convinced. All I might request is a reassignment > of blame in the commit message. Will do. Thanks for spotting it! > Thank you for your comments on my other blue-sky ideas, too. > > I need to look into why we're using wheels, and what the point is. > How much of an advantage do they have over an efficient priority queue > like a pairing heap? The only reason is performance. The wheel has O(1) insertion and deletion time while heaps and trees usually have O(log(n)). Timer wheel timers are usually timeouts and 99% of them are canceled before expiry. Networking is probably the heaviest use case followed by disk I/O. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web