lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: lowlatency-2.2.14-B1 + 2.2.14aa7 fixes crash, but...
Date
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, William Montgomery wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Benno Senoner wrote:
>
> > > I fixed the buffer.c code according to Ingo and removed a
> > > conditional_schedule from mark_buffer_clean in fs.h as spotted by Andrea.
> > > I have been testing for over 18hrs and no stuck processes yet.
> >
> > Interesting, what kind of latencies are you getting now ?
>
> 1.1ms to 1.2ms using your rtc_latency test.

excellent ! are you runnig with RTC HT=2048 ?

>
> > If the patch looks stable to you can you post a 2.2.13 or 2.2.14 patch ,
> > so that I can benchmark it ?
> >
> Its kind of hacked up right now, current kernel is 2.2.14 + 2.2.14aa7
> patch + lowlatency-2.2.14-B1 patch + ikd patch. I have not tried the
> changes on a bare 2.2.14 and I would recommend 2.2.14aa7 as a baseline.
>
> I was hoping to get more feedback before posting, also I like to
> defer to Ingo for official post.

Agreed.

I was wondering if backing out the inode freeing changes,
increases latencies in your tests.

William, thank you very much for your heavy testing.

Benno.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:1.396 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site