| Subject | Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 20 Sep 2001 17:10:48 -0400 |
| |
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 04:21, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > You've forgotten a one liner. > > > > #include <linux/locks.h> > > +#include <linux/compiler.h> > > woops, didn't trapped it because of gcc 3.0.2. thanks. > > > But this is not enough. Even with reniced artsd (-20). > > Some shorter hiccups (0.5~1 sec). > > I'm not familiar with the output of the latency bench, but I actually > read "4617" usec as the worst latency, that means 4msec, not 500/1000 > msec.
Right, the patch is returning the length preemption was unavailable (which is when a lock is held) in us. So it is indded 4ms.
But, I think Dieter is saying he _sees_ 0.5~1s latencies (in the form of audio skips). This is despite the 4ms locks being held.
-- Robert M. Love rml at ufl.edu rml at tech9.net
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|