public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dan Maas" <dmaas@dcine.com>
To: "Michael Rothwell" <rothwell@holly-springs.nc.us>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: #define HZ 1024 -- negative effects?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:02:26 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <004f01c0cdf4$f17f4ce0$0701a8c0@morph> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa.gh4u8sv.17i1q6@ifi.uio.no>

> Are there any negative effects of editing include/asm/param.h to change
> HZ from 100 to 1024? Or any other number? This has been suggested as a
> way to improve the responsiveness of the GUI on a Linux system.

I have also played around with HZ=1024 and wondered how it affects
interactivity. I don't quite understand why it could help - one thing I've
learned looking at kernel traces (LTT) is that interactive processes very,
very rarely eat up their whole timeslice (even hogs like X). So more
frequent timer interrupts shouldn't have much of an effect...

If you are burning CPU doing stuff like long compiles, then the increased HZ
might make the system appear more responsive because the CPU hog gets
pre-empted more often. However, you could get the same result just by
running the task 'nice'ly...

The only other possibility I can think of is a scheduler anomaly. A thread
arose on this list recently about strange scheduling behavior of processes
using local IPC - even though one process had readable data pending, the
kernel would still go idle until the next timer interrupt. If this is the
case, then HZ=1024 would kick the system back into action more quickly...

Of course, the appearance of better interactivity could just be a placebo
effect. Double-blind trials, anyone? =)

Regards,
Dan


       reply	other threads:[~2001-04-26  1:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <fa.gh4u8sv.17i1q6@ifi.uio.no>
2001-04-26  2:02 ` Dan Maas [this message]
2001-04-26  2:30   ` #define HZ 1024 -- negative effects? Werner Puschitz
2001-04-26  3:51   ` Mike Galbraith
2001-04-28  8:23   ` Guus Sliepen
2001-04-26 18:19 Adam J. Richter
2001-04-26 18:31 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-26 20:24   ` Dan Mann
2001-04-27 10:04     ` Mike Galbraith
2001-04-27 15:06       ` Dan Mann
2001-04-27 19:26       ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-27 20:28         ` Mike Galbraith
2001-04-27 23:22           ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-28  4:57             ` Mike Galbraith
2001-04-29  8:46               ` george anzinger
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-24 23:20 Michael Rothwell
2001-04-25 22:40 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-29 21:44 ` Jim Gettys
2001-04-29 21:59   ` Michael Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='004f01c0cdf4$f17f4ce0$0701a8c0@morph' \
    --to=dmaas@dcine.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rothwell@holly-springs.nc.us \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox