[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: voluntary-preemption: understanding latency trace
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 06:41, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> I'm seeing a mismatch between my manually-measured timings and the
> timings I see in /proc/latency_trace.
> I've got a SCHED_FIFO kernel thread at the highest priority
> (MAX_USER_RT_PRIO-1) and it's sleeping on a wait queue. The wake is
> called from an ISR. Since this thread is the highest priority in the
> system, I expect it to run before the ISR threads and softIRQ threads
> etc.
> In the ISR I sample sched_clock() just before the call to wake_up()
> and in the thread I sample sched_clock() again just after the call to
> sleep. I'm seeing an almost 4ms latency between the call to wake_up
> and the actual wakeup. However, in /proc/latency_trace, the worst
> latency I see during the running of this test is <500us.
> I must be misunderstanding how the latency traces are
> started/stopped. Can anyone shed some light? Thanks.
> My current setup is using -R5, running on a PII 400MHz system.

Ingo, any ideas here? Looks like maybe the use of sched_clock is the


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.066 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site