lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: tickless and HZ=1000 throughput advantage?
Date
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]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-20 09:37    [W:0.032 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site