Tickles scheduler

[Dragoslav Zaric]

Did anybody test and compare work of ticking and tickles scheduler ?

Currently I think it is implemented as ticking scheduler with
hard-coded frequency (usually 100 Hz).

Personally I think that tickles scheduler is much better solution, but
maybe I am over-view something and
maybe there are side effects when implementation starts ? Instead of
tick, we can wait for events to happen
(for example IRQ, add or remove process from list), and when periodic
actions are needed, we can time
schedule them dynamically based on system load.

Can somebody give me some insight in this issue if he has any
experience with this ?

Is it at all possible to implement kernel without ticking, spin system
by events and periods ?
Maybe ticking is still best solution to have fast responding system ?

Kind regards

-- 
Dragoslav Zaric

Professional Programmer
MSc Astrophysics
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/