[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: dynamic-hz
    Andrea Arcangeli writes:

    > On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 10:36:19AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
    >> The performance benefit, if any, is often lost in noise during
    >> benchmarks and when there, is less than 1%. So I was wondering if you
    >> had some specific advantage in mind for this patch? Is there some
    >> arch-specific advantage? I can certainly envision disadvantages to lower Hz.
    > My last number I've here is 1% for kernel compile. We're not talking
    > fancy desktop stuff here, we're talking about raw computing servers that
    > runs in userspace 99.9% of the time where the 1% loss is going to be
    > multiplied dozen or hundred of times. For those HZ=1000 is a pure
    > tangible disavantage.
    > For desktops 1% of cpu being lost is not an issue of course.

    Thanks. I have to admit that the real reason I wrote this email was for this
    discussion to go on record so that desktop users would not get
    inappropriately excited by this change.


    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 14:08    [W:0.026 / U:7.316 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site