Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt

[Martin J. Bligh]

--Lee Revell <rlrevell@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote (on Monday, July 11, 2005 20:30:59 -0400):

> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:39 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>> Lee Revell wrote:
>> 
>> > Tickless + sub HZ timers is a win for everyone, the multimedia people
>> > get better latency, and the laptop people get to run longer.
>> 
>> IIRC it's not a win for many systems.  Throughput goes down due to timer 
>> manipulation overhead.
> 
> Makes sense.  Anyway, this whole thread has been pretty hand wavey, I
> propose that until we see some numbers from the HZ=250 advocates, we
> leave the default alone.

Odd. Since I showed you some numbers already ... and nobody from the latency
side of the argument has come up with any?

M.

-
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/