The downside for sure it that you now interrupt the cpu 1000 times per second. The overhead in processing the interrupt. ( context save, registers saved ). The services performed at a clock ( jiffy ) tick ( timeout services, scheduling services ), are now done more frequently. but with 1 gighz machine, 1/1000sec is ~1million instructions before an jiffy happens. So if your threads complete before the million, then u r in great shape. If they take longer, then that task may be scheduled out to some other task that is also ready to run. I am not sure if a Threaded task total quantum(s) are include in scheduling priority, or each thread has their own unique scheduling priority.
/gat BTW rumor has it ( from the Dec Alpha folks ) that context switching is not very efficient on intel processors. > Martin, Stephen wrote: > > How does this affect the rest of the performance of the machine, are > there any downsides? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Hazen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: February 18, 2002 8:46 PM > To: Blackdown > Subject: Re: Why do threads take so long to wake up > underlinux > > Ok, I've rebuild the a kernel with HZ 1000 (and bumped > CLOCKS_PER_SEC to 1000 too). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
