Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt

Martin J. Bligh
2005-07-11T18:38:59Z

--On Saturday, July 09, 2005 17:25:58 -0400 Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 2005-07-09 at 13:30 -0700, randy_dunlap wrote:
>> | Then the owners of such machines can use HZ=250 and leave the default
>> | alone. Why should everyone have to bear the cost?
>>
>> indeed, why should everyone have to have 1000 timer interrupts per second?
>
> So why waste everyone's time with CONFIG_HZ when there are working
> dynamic tick solutions out there? It's just bad release engineering.

So on the flip side of this ... why are you complaining about it, instead
of working on the real fix? ;-)

Having HZ=1000 seems to just be a band-aid for not having sub-hz timers ...
it causes unnecessary overhead for other subsytems.

M.