Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751815AbVJ1V3q (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2005 17:29:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751817AbVJ1V3p (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2005 17:29:45 -0400 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:10513 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751815AbVJ1V3p (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2005 17:29:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:29:43 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Claudio Scordino Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org Subject: Re: The "best" value of HZ Message-ID: <20051028212942.GE4180@stusta.de> References: <200510280118.42731.cloud.of.andor@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200510280118.42731.cloud.of.andor@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1710 Lines: 50 On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 01:18:41AM +0200, Claudio Scordino wrote: > Hi, Hi Claudio, > during the last years there has been a lot of discussion about the "best" > value of HZ... On i386 was 100, then became 1000, and finally was set to 250. > I'm thinking to do an evaluation of this parameter using different > architectures. > > Has anybody thought to give the possibility to modify the value of HZ at boot > time instead of at compile time ? This would allow to easily test different > values on different machines and create a table containing the "best" value > for each architecture... At this moment, instead, we have to recompile the > kernel for each different value :( > > Do you think there would be much work to do that ? > Do you think it would be a desired feature the knowledge of the best value for > each architecture with more precision ? the best value for HZ is not architecture specific, it depends on the usage pattern. The rule is roughly: - low HZ for computations - high HZ for interactive usage Making HZ selectable at boot time wouldn't be hard, but I doubt it's worth it because it would make the kernel both bigger and slower. > Thanks, > > Claudio cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/