> On Mon, Jul 19 1999, Artur Skawina wrote:
> > what i would be interested in seeing is: the time it takes to
> > run a cpu bound app (eg raytracing am image) with HZ=100 and HZ=1024.
> > That would give a more realistic approximation of the overhead that
> > increasing HZ adds.
>
> Then do the bench, nobody prevents you from doing so.
Should HZ=1024 be safe on x86?
If it's not completely safe, what do I need to fix and submit patches for
so that we can be HZ=1024 on x86 for 2.4? :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/