[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: HZ, preferably as small as possible

    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.

    (Use if you can't decode)
    ------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------
    Version: 3.12
    GCS/E/G/S/AT d- s++:-- a? C++$ ULAVHI++++$ P++$ L++++(+++++)$ E W-$
    N--- o? K? w-- O- M V$ PS+ PE- Y- PGP+ t+ 5+ X+ R- !tv b++ DI? !D G
    e++++ h* r--- y-
    ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

    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: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.038 / U:43.772 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site