Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:04:16 -0400 From: Super Bisquit <superbisquit@gmail.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD PowerPC ML <freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Kern.hz= +1 hertz at anything 2500 and above. Message-ID: <CA%2BWntOspTSm3OM23KrY5vzDasuGVOU0HSK7BOuLaxgbvPVB8=g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmonFMXg_PcG=daU7Vk2r89epr6PpMHGdbnMLyFY=FgvNYQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA%2BWntOvcN%2BLEog5_W6aQUT%2BZw_5ZgEkdYEcR8QTW3zZSUOuypA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmonFMXg_PcG=daU7Vk2r89epr6PpMHGdbnMLyFY=FgvNYQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
When I started with FreeBSD on a G3 B&W, I noticed that the performance 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. 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" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BWntOspTSm3OM23KrY5vzDasuGVOU0HSK7BOuLaxgbvPVB8=g>