Re: tickless and HZ=1000 throughput advantage?

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:47:24 +0100
Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On tickless kernels, is the general consensus that for non-embedded
> systems, selecting HZ=1000 gives slightly more throughput in
> particular situations than HZ=100 or 250, due to finer timer
> intervals/granularity?

it's not about throughput. It's about latency for some things....
although now that select/poll and co use hrtimers it's not as critical
anymore.

the HZ timers aren't used much for anything time-critical nowadays.

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/