From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261956AbVGKSi7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:38:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261452AbVGKSg0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:36:26 -0400 Received: from dvhart.com ([64.146.134.43]:62133 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261640AbVGKSfh (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:35:37 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:35:33 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Lee Revell , randy_dunlap Cc: akpm@osdl.org, arjan@infradead.org, azarah@nosferatu.za.org, cw@f00f.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, christoph@lameter.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt Message-ID: <174460000.1121106933@flay> In-Reply-To: <1120944358.6488.90.camel@mindpipe> References: <200506231828.j5NISlCe020350@hera.kernel.org> <20050708214908.GA31225@taniwha.stupidest.org> <20050708145953.0b2d8030.akpm@osdl.org> <1120928891.17184.10.camel@lycan.lan> <1120932991.6488.64.camel@mindpipe> <1120933916.3176.57.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1120934163.6488.72.camel@mindpipe> <20050709121212.7539a048.akpm@osdl.org> <1120936561.6488.84.camel@mindpipe> <20050709133036.11e60a3c.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <1120944358.6488.90.camel@mindpipe> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --On Saturday, July 09, 2005 17:25:58 -0400 Lee Revell 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.