lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: setitimer 1 usec fails
David Mosberger wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 26 May 2003 15:00:53 -0700, george anzinger <george@mvista.com> said:
>
>
> George> As a test, you might try your test with HZ=1000 (a number I
> George> recommend for ia64, if at all possible).
>
> I suspect you might have a slightly biased view on this. ;-) Yes,
> HZ=1000 makes some problems easier to convert ticks to real time, but
> slower to convert real time to ticks.

Ulrich has written something on this. Maybe he could comment :)

-g

>
> Besides, the Linux kernel MUST work with (fairly) arbitrary HZ values,
> because some platforms just don't have much of a choice (e.g., Alpha
> is pretty much forced to 1024Hz).
>
> But, yes, on ia64 we can choose HZ to our liking. If someone presents
> evidence that shows a real benefit for a value other than 1024, I'm
> certainly willing to listen.
>
> --david
>
>

--
George Anzinger george@mvista.com
High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.032 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site