Subject: Re: Preparing callout(9) for a HZ-less kernel
To: Blair Sadewitz <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Doran <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/18/2007 22:43:11
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 04:45:10PM -0400, Blair Sadewitz wrote:
> I think LFS might need some modification for this, as there are calls
> to ltsleep() for hz/n where n is 10, 100, or maybe some other multiple
> of 10. How would this be addressed?
ltsleep/mtsleep are obsoleted by condvars for most uses. I now think I made
a mistake with the condvars and that they should accept an absolute wakeup
time instead of a delta. That's easy enough to do except for handling the
effects of changing the system clock.