[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] i386 dynamic ticks 2.6.13-rc4 (code reordered)
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 18:15, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Con Kolivas <> [050802 00:36]:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 05:17 pm, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > But this you can verify by booting to single user mode and then running
> > > pmstats 5, and if ticks is not below 25HZ, there's something in the
> > > kernel polling.
> >
> > I'm removing modules and they don't seem to do anything so I'm not sure
> > what else to try.
> If you have 130HZ in single user mode, it's some kernel driver.
> You could printk the the next timer, then grep for that in

I kept pulling modules and eventually got to 27Hz so something was definitely

I need to ask you why you think limiting the maximum Hz is a bad idea? On a
laptop, say we have set the powersave governor, we have already told the
kernel we are interested in maximising power saving at the expense of
performance. Would it not be appropriate for this to be linked in a way that
sets maximum Hz to some value that maximises power save (whatever that value
is) at that time?

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-02 12:58    [W:0.048 / U:1.428 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site