linux-kernel - tickless and HZ=1000 throughput advantage?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:47:24 +0100
From:	Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@...il.com>
To:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: tickless and HZ=1000 throughput advantage?

On tickless kernels, is the general consensus that for non-embedded
systems, selecting HZ=1000 gives slightly more throughput in
particular situations than HZ=100 or 250, due to finer timer
intervals/granularity?

(low HZ used to cause problems with low-rate QoS packet queues when
timer scheduling was selected)

Thanks,
  Daniel
-- 
Daniel J Blueman
--
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/