Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Thu 26th Apr 2007 06:36 UTC, submitted by RJop
Permalink for comment 234086
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.




Member since:
2005-12-06
As far as I understand it (but please bear in mind I'm no expert), tickless means that the kernel will not necessarily wake up periodically anymore.
Originally, a timer was programmed to generate an interrupt ("timer tick") a fixed number of times per second, usually in the range of 100-1000 Hz. That also meant the processor would possibly wake from sleep that many times per second, causing unnecessary power consumption on a lightly loaded system.
A tickless system might disable the timer interrupt altogether when entering an idle state, so it will only wake up when an I/O device demands the attention of the kernel. Of course it would be re-enabled again as soon as multiple processes are competing for processor resources.
If anyone has corrections to the information stated above, please don't hesitate to post them. I'm curious about the exact implications as well.