|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

Posted Jan 2, 2019 7:33 UTC (Wed) by flussence (guest, #85566)
In reply to: Improving idle behavior in tickless systems by rweikusat2
Parent article: Improving idle behavior in tickless systems

>And this is simply not true. A NIC will generate interrupts in response to uncontrollable, external events for both sending and receiving. The same is true for any other kind of interrupt-using device not driven by the computer itself.
Input devices are some of the most predictable, actually. A pointer interrupt is statistically almost certain to be followed by another (thanks to Newton's laws of physics), and at regularly spaced intervals (grep MOUSE_DPI /lib/udev/hwdb.d/70-mouse.hwdb). A keyboard key down event is often followed by a corresponding key up a few milliseconds later, or some action on a known timeout.

Strong assumptions can also be made about network interrupts due to the earliest departure time queueing algorithm, wifi packet intervals, characteristics of low-spec consumer ISP hardware, timer quantization everywhere else in the stack. I just left wireshark open for a minute and saw several flows with regularly spaced packets.

Algorithmically generated inputs are really not good sources of entropy, if they were servers wouldn't need hardware RNGs.


to post comments


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