HZ value changed from 250 to 1000 in the latest updated kernel

[John DeDourek]

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> Even ntp should be better off with this more finegrained data, but I can
> believe it'll need to get used to it for some time ;)
> 
Can anyone report on whether the lost tick interrupt problem at 1000Hz
interrupt rate been firmly resolved on slower machines and machines
wih the CPU speed stepped down?  I haven't looked at the interrupt
handling code in some time.

The net effect of a lost interrupt was the appearance that the system
time stood still for one clock interval out of the two that had just
passed.  This caused significant variations in system time.  Ntp was
forced to accelerate the clock until it caught up with true time and
then deaccelerate to avoid overshoot. This was repeated with every
lost interrupt resulting in system time that observed a "sawtooth"
path relative to true time.