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

Martin J. Bligh
2005-07-12T04:09:29Z

--Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote (on Monday, July 11, 2005 20:30:59 -0400):

> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:39 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>> Lee Revell wrote:
>>
>> > Tickless + sub HZ timers is a win for everyone, the multimedia people
>> > get better latency, and the laptop people get to run longer.
>>
>> IIRC it's not a win for many systems. Throughput goes down due to timer
>> manipulation overhead.
>
> Makes sense. Anyway, this whole thread has been pretty hand wavey, I
> propose that until we see some numbers from the HZ=250 advocates, we
> leave the default alone.

Odd. Since I showed you some numbers already ... and nobody from the latency
side of the argument has come up with any?

M.