Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:05:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:05:56 -0400 Received: from gateway.ukaea.org.uk ([194.128.63.73]:59200 "EHLO fuspcnjc.culham.ukaea.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 04:05:56 -0400 Message-ID: <3DB3B7A4.C40C1995@ukaea.org.uk> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:15:32 +0100 From: Neil Conway X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Love CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4: variable HZ References: <3DAFF5C9.807BE885@ukaea.org.uk> <1034966657.722.838.camel@phantasy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1073 Lines: 26 Robert Love wrote: > OK, sure, but why specify a power-of-two HZ? There is absolutely no > reason to, at least on x86. Totally agree. However, I wasn't restricting it to powers of two. You just happened to have mentioned 512 (wrt. RedHat). > Want 512? 500 will do just as well and has the benefit of (a) being a > multiple of the previous HZ and (b) evenly dividing into our concept of > time. 512 ~= 500. 150 !~= 100. Would someone want to use 150? Maybe... Anyway, it's no big deal if you prefer to leave your patch as-is. However, if you do, then you need to at least add a comment to the code and modify the Configure.help to make it clear that only integer multiples work properly. In fact, you could just make the HZ Config value be a "speed-up ratio" which would make various bits of the patch cleaner. Neil - 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/