Messages in this thread | | | From | Tim Blechmann <> | Subject | Re: tickless and HZ=1000 throughput advantage? | Date | Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:34:30 +0200 |
| |
On 09/20/2009 01:12 AM, Ben Nizette wrote: > On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 18:50 +0100, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > >> Agreed. Do you think there is still a small case for moving to HZ=1000 >> (given it's effectively free) in situations like: > > Sure HZ=1000 gives you more accurate sleeps, that's kind of the point, > but since when has it been "effectively free"? > http://lwn.net/Articles/331607/
i'd be curious, what effect does it have on userspace applications? like, does it effect the wakeup latency of userspace (pthread) mutexes/conditions or posix semaphores?
thnx, tim
-- tim@klingt.org http://tim.klingt.org
Desperation is the raw material of drastic change. Only those who can leave behind everything they have ever believed in can hope to escape. William S. Burroughs
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |