Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:51:02 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Super Bisquit <superbisquit@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD PowerPC ML <freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Kern.hz= +1 hertz at anything 2500 and above. Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307251150400.12856@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BWntOspTSm3OM23KrY5vzDasuGVOU0HSK7BOuLaxgbvPVB8=g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA%2BWntOvcN%2BLEog5_W6aQUT%2BZw_5ZgEkdYEcR8QTW3zZSUOuypA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmonFMXg_PcG=daU7Vk2r89epr6PpMHGdbnMLyFY=FgvNYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BWntOspTSm3OM23KrY5vzDasuGVOU0HSK7BOuLaxgbvPVB8=g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> improved with a higher kern.hz rating. Unless the future holds an emu20k2, > there will be RAM used from the motherboard. > 1. I will need a real-time or a faster kernel- hence the high rate wanted- > because the devices to be built will be used in an active environment: art, > music, audio control. > 2. Any system with limited memory and a low CPU hertz rate benefits from > the higher kern.hz setting. rather opposite. more kern.hz=more interrupts. > 3. Why not? If it works for PowerPC, SPARC64, AMD64, and i386 then it may > work for other architectures. > 4. Some applications may be ran from within a jail. > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> Well, why is it reducing latency? That's the thing you should investigate. >> >> Is it because processes aren't getting enough time? or too much time? >> Or the audio device isn't getting enough time to run? etc. >> >> >> >> -adrian >> >> On 24 July 2013 15:35, Super Bisquit <superbisquit@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2009-September/051789.html >>> >>> This is the thread that I was referring to earlier. Since the patch is >> for >>> 2009, what are the chances it would work with 10.x or 9.x? >>> >>> On PowerPC machines with a low MHz rate- or any machine with a CPU rate >> of >>> 800 MHz or less- increasing the kern.hz improves performance and cuts >> down >>> on latency. I am building audio applications and suites that are used in >>> different projects. A G3 based machine should be able to run a kernel >> with >>> kern.hz=5000 with no problem. Unfortunately, this cannot be done. >>> >>> @PowerPC: some of you may find that performance does increase at a higher >>> kern.hz rate. >>> >>> @Hackers & Current: What's the chance that the default rate limit can be >>> raised to 5k? >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ppc >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ppc-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1307251150400.12856>