[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4703DF80.5010405@linux.intel.com>
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