Re: dynamic-hz

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote:
>
> The patch only does HZ at dynamic time. But of course it's absolutely
>  trivial to define it at compile time, it's probably a 3 liner on top of
>  my current patch ;). However personally I don't think the three liner
>  will worth the few seconds more spent configuring the kernel ;).

We still have 1000-odd places which do things like

	schedule_timeout(HZ/10);

which will now involve a runtime divide.  The propagation of msleep() and
ssleep() will reduce that a bit, but not much.

It's so simple to turn all those into compile-time divides that we may as
well do it.