Lee Revell wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 18:18 +0100, Patrizio Bassi wrote:
Jeffrey Hundstad ha scritto:
Since you're going to 250 Hz. Please, if you would, see if you can
tell any performance change and report that as well. I'm more than a
little skeptical that you'll notice. BTW: Your battery life should be
a little better at 100 Hz also.
sincerely i can notice that task and application switching is a bit slower.
i have a 500mhz cpu so i think i can notice a bit the difference.
i can't estimate it mmm...
i'll say no more that 5-8%.
but i don't know where i'm gaining speed..
Um, wasn't a consensus reached at OLS two years ago that the target for
desktop responsiveness would be 1ms which is impossible with HZ=100 or
250?
Go back and reread the thread in the archives. The short answer is that
he who controls the code controls the decisions. I just fix it
everywhere, since 250 is too fast for optimal battery life, too slow for
optimal response or multimedia, and not optimal for any server
application I run (usenet, dns, mail, http, firewall).
A perfect compromise is one which makes everyone reasonably happy; this
is like the XOR of that, it leaves everyone slightly dissatisfied. ;-)
I'm convinced that Linus choose this value to make everyone slightly
unhappy, so development of various variable rate and tick skipping
projects would continue. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to have
happened :-(
--
-bill davidsen ([email protected])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
