| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:29:20 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> CC: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Anders Bostr?m <anders@...trom.dyndns.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: PROBLEM: high load average when idle Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> not sure this is going to help; I mean, the load gets only updated in actual >> timer interrupts... and on a tickless system there's very few of those >> around..... and usually at places round_jiffies() already put a timer on. > > Yeah, you're right. Although in practice, at least on a system running > X, I'd expect that there still is lots of other timers going on, hiding > the issue. eh not really; on a normal distro desktop you maybe have 10 wakeups/sec or so; on a tuned one you have 2 or less. > > Hmm. Maybe Anders' problem stems partly from the fact that he really is > using the tweaks to make that tickless theory more true than it tends to > be on most systems? we fixed a TON of stuff over the last months.. standard desktops (F8 / next Ubuntu) will be around 10 wakeups/sec, in a lab environment you can get below 2 ;) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists