Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 Jul 2002 01:50:20 +0200 | From | "J.A. Magallon" <> | Subject | Re: HZ, preferably as small as possible |
| |
On 2002.07.11 Thunder from the hill wrote: >Hi, > >On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: >> That makes a ton of sense. >> >> > But on the other hand, increasing HZ has perf/latency benefits, yes? Have >> > these been quantified? >> >> Not that I'm aware of. And I'd regard any such claims with some >> scepticism. >> >> > I'd either like to see a HZ that has balanced >> > power/performance, or could we perhaps detect we are on a system that cares >> > about power (aka a laptop) and tweak its value at runtime? > >Want a config option? Either int or bool (CONFIG_LOW_HZ). It's not too >much effort. >
How about a <boot> option ? linux hz=[low,high]
It is runtime, but just one time.
-- J.A. Magallon \ Software is like sex: It's better when it's free mailto:jamagallon@able.es \ -- Linus Torvalds, FSF T-shirt Linux werewolf 2.4.19-rc1-jam2, Mandrake Linux 8.3 (Cooker) for i586 gcc (GCC) 3.1.1 (Mandrake Linux 8.3 3.1.1-0.7mdk) - 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/
| |