[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.6.16-rt1
    K.R. Foley wrote:
    > Ingo Molnar wrote:
    >> * K.R. Foley <> wrote:
    >>> Sorry I have been onsite and completely buried today. Am running an
    >>> initial test on both UP and SMP now with 2.6.16-rt1. UP doesn't look
    >>> bad at all. SMP on the other hand doesn't look so good. I will give
    >>> -rt4 a spin when these are done.
    >> thanks for the testing - i'll check SMP too.
    >> Ingo
    > OK. On my dual 933 under heavy load I get the following with 2.6.16-rt4
    > and I get tons of missed interrupts. Running 2.6.15-rc16 I get a max of
    > 88usec with most falling under 30usec. On my UP AthlonXP 1700 I get a
    > max of 19usec with 2.6.16-rt4 under load. What sort of results do you
    > see on SMP?

    Found something interesting. Having Wakeup latency timing turned on
    makes a HUGE difference. I turned it off and recompiled and now I am
    seeing numbers back in line with what I expected from 2.6.16-rt4. Sorry,
    but I had no idea it would make that much difference. I don't have a
    complete run yet, but I have seen enough to know that I am not seeing
    tons of missed interrupts and the highest reported latency thus far is
    61 usec.

    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: 2006-03-22 17:13    [W:0.023 / U:33.408 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site