John Baldwin wrote:
On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:27:42 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
I'm seeing similar results.
[r...@orangebox /usr/home/gcooper]# dmesg | grep 'Timecounter '
Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0
Timecounter ACPI-fast frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000
Timecounter HPET
On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:27:42 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
I'm seeing similar results.
[r...@orangebox /usr/home/gcooper]# dmesg | grep 'Timecounter '
Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0
Timecounter ACPI-fast frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000
Timecounter HPET frequency 14318180
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:46:41 -0400
John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Sunday 26 April 2009 10:27:42 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
Why's the default ACPI-fast? For power-saving functionality or
because of the `quality' factor? What is the criteria that
determines the `quality' of a clock
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:50:31AM +0200, Pieter de Goeje wrote:
While fiddling with the sysctl kern.timecounter.hardware, I found out
that on my system HPET is significantly faster than ACPI-fast.
I did some extensive testing on a variety of AMD and Intel boards and
never found a system where
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Pieter de Goeje pie...@degoeje.nl wrote:
Dear hackers,
While fiddling with the sysctl kern.timecounter.hardware, I found out that on
my system HPET is significantly faster than ACPI-fast. Using the program
below I measured the number of clock_gettime() calls
5 matches
Mail list logo
