Re: Power consumption HZ100, HZ250, HZ1000: new numbers

[Jim Crilly <jim@why.dont.jablowme.net>]

On 08/01/05 12:36:16AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > If the kernel defaults are irrelevant, then it would make more sense to
> > leave the default HZ as 1000 and not to enable the cpufreq and ACPI in
> > order to keep with the principle of least surprise for people who do use
> > kernel.org kernels.
> 
> Well, I'd say you want ACPI enabled. New machine do not even boot
> without that. Default config should be usefull; set ACPI off, and
> you'll not be able to even power machine down.

And there are older machines that won't boot with it enabled. The machine
I'm typing this on has a really shitty ACPI implementation, I don't remember
the details because it's been so long but I know that I have to disable ACPI 
for it to work right.

I'm not saying defconfig should never be changed, but changing what can and
will cause noticeable breakage should be avoided if possible. And in this
case it doesn't seem to me that the benefits of changing HZ in the middle
of a "stable" series outweigh the added latency.

> 								Pavel

Jim.
-
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/