Ar Mer, 2006-11-08 am 21:48 +0100, ysgrifennodd Arjan van de Ven:
> > I'd argue we should remove 250 and add 300, but that might be excess
> > disruption for now.
>
>
> the last time 300 was proposed the counter argument was that it was
> lousy in terms of PIT rounding... did you check that out?
It keeps time better than 250 when I tried it. It is not perfect but
then the PIT runs at a stupid rate so any choice is a little bit off. I
think there might be a better argument anyway for making HZ fixed at
1000 and adding a boot time parameter/sysctl value which is a "ticks
divisor", so on a server you can do
echo "10" >/proc/sys/tick_granularity
and jiffies bumps in 10s 1/10th as often. That needs someone who
understands the maths and the behaviour of the time slew and xntp stuff
to do the job right though, and that isn't me.
Alan
-
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]
