[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: setitimer lowlatency-2.2.13-A1 questions

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, William Montgomery wrote:
> > I tried using setitimer as a scheduling source for lowlatency testing
> > with generally good results. I left my test running over the weekend
> > and found some large latencies had occurred. It appears that since
> > the signal generation occurs in timer_bh, it is possible for a user
> > task to run between when the timer_interrupt occurs and when timer_bh
> > runs (~2msec in my case).
> that should not be possible (except on SMP where there might be a window).
> You are not running SMP, right? The TIMER_BH is run right when the IRQ
> handler returns to non-irq context (which might be user-space or kernel
> space), so it's not possible to 'lose' a TIMER_BH event due to some task
> running. BHs might get delayed due to interrupts though, so you might want
> to profile how long various interrupt sources execute.
Oops, forgot to include in previous post -- I am not running SMP.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.070 / U:44.772 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site