Re: Why HZ on i386 is 100 ?

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@suse.cz)
Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 13:00:22 EST


Hi!

> Davide> i still have pieces of paper on my desk about tests done on
> Davide> my dual piii where by hacking HZ to 1000 the kernel build
> Davide> time went from an average of 2min:30sec to an average
> Davide> 2min:43sec. that is pretty close to 10%
>
> The last time I measured timer tick overhead on ia64 it was well below
> 1% of overhead. I don't really like using kernel builds as a
> benchmark, because there are far too many variables for the results to
> have any long-term or cross-platform value. But since it's popular, I
> did measure it quickly on a relatively slow (old) Itanium box: with
> 100Hz, the kernel compile was about 0.6% faster than with 1024Hz
> (2.4.18 UP kernel).

.5% still looks like a lot to me. Good compiler optimization is .5% on
average...

And think what it does with old 386sx.. Maybe time for those "tick on demand"
patches?
                                                                Pavel

-- 
Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt,
details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html.

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 22:00:31 EST