< plain text, Please, :-) >
Madhavan.Venkataraman wrote:
>Liu, Jiang wrote:
>>Maybe Aubrey means whether could we aggregate non-realtime timer to
reduce CPU wakeups.
>>For example, 100 non-realtime timers with 1-second interval may
distribute as one
>>trigger per 10ms, so could we aggregate these timers, say at the end
of each second?
>>I think delaying non-realtime timer is acceptable to improve power
efficiency.
>You cannot change the behavior of callouts for the sake
>of power efficiency. It will mean that we introduce a delay
>in each of the aggregated timers. This could screw up
>drivers, TCP timers, etc. The maximum we can do is
>to make sure that callouts are event driven as opposed
>to polled (every tick) so that work is done by a CPU
>only when there is a need.
We may not want to touch driver, kernel event, just `setrun batch
process for my quick thoughts.
I'd like to do more investigation for it.
Thanks,
-Aubrey
