Re: No 100 HZ timer!

[george anzinger]

Ben Greear wrote:
> 
> Bret Indrelee wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> > > Bret Indrelee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> > > > > Bret Indrelee wrote:
> > > > > > Keep all timers in a sorted double-linked list. Do the insert
> > > > > > intelligently, adding it from the back or front of the list depending on
> > > > > > where it is in relation to existing entries.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this is too slow, especially for a busy system, but there are
> > > > > solutions...
> > > >
> > > > It is better than the current solution.
> > >
> > > Uh, where are we talking about.  The current time list insert is real
> > > close to O(1) and never more than O(5).
> >
> > I don't like the cost of the cascades every (as I recall) 256
> > interrupts. This is more work than is done in the rest of the interrupt
> > processing, happens during the tick interrupt, and results in a rebuild of
> > much of the table.

Right, it needs to go, we need to eliminate the "lumps" in time :)
> >
> > -Bret
> 
> Wouldn't a heap be a good data structure for a list of timers?  Insertion
> is log(n) and finding the one with the least time is O(1), ie pop off the
> front....  It can be implemented in an array which should help cache
> coherency and all those other things they talked about in school :)
> 
I must be missing something here.  You get log(n) from what?  B-trees? 
How would you manage them to get the needed balance?  Stopping the world
to re-balance is worse than the cascade.  I guess I need to read up on
this stuff.  A good pointer would be much appreciated. 

Meanwhile, I keep thinking of a simple doubly linked list in time
order.  To speed it up keep an array of pointers to the first N whole
jiffie points and maybe pointers to coarser points beyond the first N. 
Make N, say 512.  Build the pointers as needed.  This should give
something like O(n/N) insertion and O(1) removal.

George