Re: HZ > 100 overhead

[Paul Barton-Davis]

>> >Wouldn't you say that an HZ > 100 kernel is the cleanest solution?
>> 
>> its the cleanest, but not the best. HZ = 1000 adds about 8% overhead
>> to IRQ processing *all the time*.
>
>Are you *sure* about this?  I seem to remember there was some debate
>about that figure on linux-kernel.

Ed Hall measured it, and my overall impression of Ed is that I'd trust
him to do this correctly. what did the l-k folks think ?