[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:0.408 / U:1.304 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site