> If you want to allow arbitrary values of HZ, as opposed to powers of 2,
> then Mill's code needs a *divide*, not a *shift*.  Divides are
> expensive.  Putting them inside hardclock() is  prohibitively
> expensive, on some machines, in the opinions of people who've looked
> at such things.
I don't want to be part of this flamewar, but ...
A divide by a constant (which essentially is what we have) can be
turned into a multiply. Is a multiply really too expensive to have in
hardclock()?  Then you must be running a truly pityful machine.

	-- Lennart