Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:20:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:20:51 -0400 Received: from otter.mbay.net ([206.55.237.2]:47364 "EHLO otter.mbay.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:20:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:20:39 -0700 (PDT) From: John Alvord To: Pavel Machek cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, Davide Libenzi , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why HZ on i386 is 100 ? In-Reply-To: <20020421180021.A155@toy.ucw.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Davide> i still have pieces of paper on my desk about tests done on > > Davide> my dual piii where by hacking HZ to 1000 the kernel build > > Davide> time went from an average of 2min:30sec to an average > > Davide> 2min:43sec. that is pretty close to 10% > > > > The last time I measured timer tick overhead on ia64 it was well below > > 1% of overhead. I don't really like using kernel builds as a > > benchmark, because there are far too many variables for the results to > > have any long-term or cross-platform value. But since it's popular, I > > did measure it quickly on a relatively slow (old) Itanium box: with > > 100Hz, the kernel compile was about 0.6% faster than with 1024Hz > > (2.4.18 UP kernel). > > .5% still looks like a lot to me. Good compiler optimization is .5% on > average... > > And think what it does with old 386sx.. Maybe time for those "tick on demand" > patches? Doesn't IBM have a tickless patch.. useful when demonstrating 10,000 virtual linux machines on a single system. john alvord - 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/