![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Mark Mielke wrote: > > > Increasing the HZ can only improve responsiveness, however, there is a > > cost (mentioned by others). The cost is that the scheduler is executed > > more often per second. If the scheduler does the same amount of work > > per tick, but there are more ticks per second, the scheduler does more > > work overall, and the CPU is free for use by the processes less. > > Why are you discussing Linux 1.2 ? > > Linux is not running the scheduler each cpu tick and hasn't > done this for years. Very true. However it does run the timer/clock code every tick, which is still additional overhead when the tick time is reduced. The basic idea (increased overhead at higher HZ) is sound, the details are not. Chris -- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||