* Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Another alternative would be for systems with C3 to fall-back to a
> > periodic tick scheme that we have today. From a power point of view,
> > HZ=100 would be only a little bit worse than Windows HZ=64.
> > However, FC6 seems to have marched off an built with
> > HZ=1000 -- so we'd have some challenges with static HZ too...
>
> With dyntick enabled kernels you get ~ HZ=37 as the worst case with
> PIT, while we go down to ~4HZ with HPET / apic timer (as long as it
> works)
s/worst case/best case
the lower we can make the timer irq rate on an idle system, the better.
HPET allows us to go from 37 Hz down to 4 Hz.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
