Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Nov 1999 16:31:41 -0500 (EST) | From | William Montgomery <> | Subject | lowlatency-2.2.13-A1 questions |
| |
The udelay_resched(n) macro does not seem to reference "n", would the following be an acceptable implementation?
#define udelay_resched(n) (\ { int i; \ for (i = 0; i < ((n+9)/10); i++) { \ conditional_schedule(); \ udelay(10); \ } \ })
---------
I have been using the lowlatency-2.2.10-N6B.patch with good results. I recently installed the 2.2.13 kernel and applied the lowlatency-2.2.13-A1 patch, however the results were not quite as good. The 2.2.10-N6B patch on the 2.2.10 kernel gave +/-500usec scheduling latencies whereas the 2.2.13-A1 patch on the kernel gave +/-3msec latencies. Any idea why? These results were obtained on a Pentium III 500MHz.
How were the high latency areas identified? I would be very happy to help in testing and contributing to this patch.
Wm
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |