[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070829102005.5450723e@freepuppy.rosehill.hemminger.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:20:05 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
Cc: DervishD <lkml@...vishd.net>,
Linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: cpufreq affects traffic control rates
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:26:24 +0200 (CEST)
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de> wrote:
>
> On Aug 28 2007 15:23, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >> I noticed lately that my traffic control rates were being very slow,
> >> about 40% less than expected, and finally spotted the problem: cpufreq.
> >>
> >> Looks like HTB puts buckets according to the requested rate but
> >> assuming that the CPU is running at its default clock or something like
> >> that.
> >>
> >Is the problem configuration of network scheduler clock? In 2.6.20 and earlier, you
> >could use CPU cycle counter (later kernels only use time of day). So try
> >switching to jiffies or gettimeofday.
>
> This should not have been removed. CPUs with constant_tsc
> could still be used with "CPU cycle counter" method.
>
>
> Jan
It was removed because the core clock subsystem now manages the choice
of CPU clock correctly and should provide the highest resolution possible
on the hardware.
Plus a whole bunch of grotty macro code gets removed. And the math
handling was more standard/simpler.
--
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
-
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