Re: setitimer 1 usec fails

[george anzinger]

David Mosberger wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 26 May 2003 15:00:53 -0700, george anzinger <[e-mail]> said:
> 
> 
>   George> As a test, you might try your test with HZ=1000 (a number I
>   George> recommend for ia64, if at all possible).
> 
> I suspect you might have a slightly biased view on this. ;-) Yes,
> HZ=1000 makes some problems easier to convert ticks to real time, but
> slower to convert real time to ticks.

Ulrich has written something on this.  Maybe he could comment  :)

-g

> 
> Besides, the Linux kernel MUST work with (fairly) arbitrary HZ values,
> because some platforms just don't have much of a choice (e.g., Alpha
> is pretty much forced to 1024Hz).
> 
> But, yes, on ia64 we can choose HZ to our liking.  If someone presents
> evidence that shows a real benefit for a value other than 1024, I'm
> certainly willing to listen.
> 
> 	--david
> 
> 

-- 
George Anzinger   [e-mail]
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml