From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030344AbVH0J0u (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:26:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030352AbVH0J0u (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:26:50 -0400 Received: from lucidpixels.com ([66.45.37.187]:8393 "EHLO lucidpixels.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030344AbVH0J0t (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:26:49 -0400 Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 05:26:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Piszcz X-X-Sender: jpiszcz@p34 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Kernel 2.6.13-rc7 Latency Question Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org These options are self-explanatory: x x ( ) No Forced Preemption (Server) x x x x ( ) Voluntary Kernel Preemption (Desktop) x x x x (X) Preemptible Kernel (Low-Latency Desktop) x x It says 100 HZ or 250 HZ is good for SMP systems; however, what if I am using a P4 machine with 1 CPU (HT), is 1000HZ still the way to go, as its not really 2 *REAL* cpus? lqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqk x x x ( ) 100 HZ x x x ( ) 250 HZ x x x (X) 1000 HZ