Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86: Reduce the default HZ value | From | Alok Kataria <> | Date | Tue, 05 May 2009 14:57:05 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 14:21 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Alok Kataria wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Given that there were no major objections that came up regarding > > reducing the HZ value in http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/27/499. > > > > Below is the patch which actually reduces it, please consider for tip. > > > > What is the benefit of this?
I did some experiments on linux 2.6.29 guests running on VMware and noticed that the number of timer interrupts could have some slowdown on the total throughput on the system. A simple tight loop experiment showed that with HZ=1000 we took about 264sec to complete the loop and that same loop took about 255sec with HZ=100. You can find more information here http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/28/401
And with HRT i don't see any downsides in terms of increased latencies for device timer's or anything of that sought.
> > I can see at least one immediate downside: some timeout values in the > kernel are still maintained in units of HZ (like poll, I believe), and > so with a lower HZ value we'll have higher roundoff errors.
If that at all is such a big problem shouldn't we think about moving to using schedule_hrtimeout for such cases rather than relying on jiffy based timeouts. The hrtimer explanation over here http://www.tglx.de/hrtimers.html also talks about where these HZ (timer wheel) based timeouts be used and shouldn't really be dependent on accurate timing.
Also the default HZ value was 250 before this commit
commit 5cb04df8d3f03e37a19f2502591a84156be71772 x86: defconfig updates
And it was 250 for a very long time before that too. The commit log doesn't explain why the value was bumped up either.
Thanks, Alok
| |