Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Jul 1999 17:00:17 -0400 (EDT) | From | Gregory Maxwell <> | Subject | Re: Measured overhead of timer interrupts |
| |
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19 1999, Artur Skawina wrote: > > what i would be interested in seeing is: the time it takes to > > run a cpu bound app (eg raytracing am image) with HZ=100 and HZ=1024. > > That would give a more realistic approximation of the overhead that > > increasing HZ adds. > > Then do the bench, nobody prevents you from doing so.
Should HZ=1024 be safe on x86?
If it's not completely safe, what do I need to fix and submit patches for so that we can be HZ=1024 on x86 for 2.4? :)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |