Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: dynamic-hz | From | Hans Kristian Rosbach <> | Date | Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:19:50 +0100 |
| |
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 12:02, Andrew Morton wrote: > Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote: > > The performance benefit, if any, is often lost in noise during > > benchmarks and when there, is less than 1%. So I was wondering if you > > had some specific advantage in mind for this patch? Is there some > > arch-specific advantage? I can certainly envision disadvantages to lower Hz. > > There are apparently some laptops which exhibit appreciable latency between > the start of ACPI sleep and actually consuming less power. The 1ms wakeup > frequency will shorten battery life on these machines significantly. (I > forget the exact numbers - Len will know).
Is there any recommended lower bound setting? Would there be a point in recommending lower settings for desktops running only text consoles opposed to X desktops?
-HK
- 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/
| |