lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4
Sorry for the late response, I had to reinstall my system after a FS
corruption...

On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:31:43PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > These test run only very short with hackbench as worlkload (5 minutes).
> > Though I running these tests now for more than year with v4.4-rt and
> > some times the newer -rt releases and I've never seen the latency
> > numbers above 200us unless something was broken. Given that 5 minutes is
> > not really long, I'll let those test run for longer to see if I get the
> > same results when they run for one hour.

- 5.9.0-rc8-rt12, ca 5h
T: 0 (11626) P:80 C:15092432 Min: 17 Act: 34 Avg: 43 Max: 226

- 5.9.0-rc8-rt13, ca 1.5h
T: 0 (24661) P:80 C:5581936 Min: 21 Act: 35 Avg: 45 Max: 250

- 5.9.0-rc8-rt14, ca 1h
T: 0 ( 942) P:80 C:6522320 Min: 20 Act: 27 Avg: 44 Max: 352

This matches with the 5 minutes runs. -rt13 was still okay and -rt14
is clearly worse.

> > 5.10.0-rc2-rt4 vs 5.10.0-rc2-rt4(lazy preemption disabled)
> >
> > 0_cyclicdeadline t2-max-latency pass/pass 274.00/ 61.00 349.18%
>
> So the value went from 274us to 61us after disabling lazy-preempt?

Yes, that was all I changed. I want to redo this measurement. It
really looks a bit bogus. Though, one thing after the other :)

Daniel

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-11-11 19:40    [W:0.260 / U:0.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site