|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

Posted Dec 31, 2018 21:46 UTC (Mon) by rweikusat2 (subscriber, #117920)
In reply to: Improving idle behavior in tickless systems by corbet
Parent article: Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

The code still doesn't and cannot predict device interrupts. That's something the article simply got wrong. Some part of it is based on the assumption that an idle state shouldn't be used if more than 4 of the last 8 measured idle periods were shorter than its so-called target residency. There doesn't seem to be any published rationale for this design and small powers of 2 always raise the suspicion of someone picking a number from a hat.

This may well be a sensible heuristic but a heuristic it remains --- no fortune telling aka "prediction" involved.


to post comments

Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

Posted Dec 31, 2018 23:48 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

> This may well be a sensible heuristic but a heuristic it remains --- no fortune telling aka "prediction" involved.

Prediction != fortune telling. There are multiple meanings for the same word.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prediction

One of them is forecast which is defined as

"to calculate or predict (some future event or condition) usually as a result of study and analysis of available pertinent data"


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds