martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > Michael Schuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > After digging in the source i have found that timec.c have an routine for
> > > computing the so called "Hz quality".
> >
> > During boot, the kernel probes several time counters and
Hello,
thanks to Oliver and Michael for explain me the "mechanics"
behind timecounter and "Hz quality".
I have send the question, why i have to wonder about
different IRQ-Counts but same HZ. It is really thaat HZ on
both machines is the same.
I have only knowed the old behavior.
I set the HZ ove
Oliver Fromme wrote:
Michael Schuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i be very surprised about the performance of RELENG_6.
> Congratulations to the entire Team for this very good work.
>
> Now i have 2 Machines installed with 6.0-RC1, and i have seen that on
> both machines the Hz is differntl
On Monday, 7. November 2005 17:10, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Michael Schuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i be very surprised about the performance of RELENG_6.
> > Congratulations to the entire Team for this very good work.
> >
> > Now i have 2 Machines installed with 6.0-RC1, and i have seen tha
Michael Schuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i be very surprised about the performance of RELENG_6.
> Congratulations to the entire Team for this very good work.
>
> Now i have 2 Machines installed with 6.0-RC1, and i have seen that on
> both machines the Hz is differntly with GENERIC-Kernel.
Hello,
i be very surprised about the performance of RELENG_6.
Congratulations to the entire Team for this very good work.
Now i have 2 Machines installed with 6.0-RC1, and i have seen that on
both machines the Hz is differntly with GENERIC-Kernel.
Machine A is an Sempron 2400+ that runs as 2500+
