[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:0.045 / U:2.460 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site