[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Measured overhead of timer interrupts

    > > On Mon, Jul 19 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:
    > > > what i would be interested in seeing is: the time it takes to
    > > > run a cpu bound app (eg raytracing am image) with HZ=100 and HZ=1024.
    > > > That would give a more realistic approximation of the overhead that
    > > > increasing HZ adds.
    > >
    > > Then do the bench, nobody prevents you from doing so.
    > Should HZ=1024 be safe on x86?

    Yes. Irda used to be broken w.r.t. HZ but is fixed now. Oh and you'll
    need to recompile things like top. But with exception of pstools
    HZ=1024 i386 system works just well.

    I'm really Look at Pavel
    Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.023 / U:0.160 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site