Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:35:00 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8.1-P7 |
| |
* Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-08-21 at 20:06, K.R. Foley wrote: > > I just posted a similar trace of ~4141 usec from P6 here: > > > > http://www.cybsft.com/testresults/2.6.8.1-P6/latency-trace1.txt > > > > This looks wrong: > > 00000003 0.008ms (+0.001ms): dummy_socket_sock_rcv_skb (tcp_v4_rcv) > 00000004 0.008ms (+0.000ms): tcp_v4_do_rcv (tcp_v4_rcv) > 00000004 0.009ms (+0.000ms): tcp_rcv_established (tcp_v4_do_rcv) > 00010004 3.998ms (+3.989ms): do_IRQ (tcp_rcv_established) > 00010005 3.999ms (+0.000ms): mask_and_ack_8259A (do_IRQ) > 00010005 4.001ms (+0.002ms): generic_redirect_hardirq (do_IRQ) > 00010004 4.002ms (+0.000ms): generic_handle_IRQ_event (do_IRQ) > > Probably a false positive, Ingo would know better. What kind of > stress testing were you doing?
indeed this looks suspect. Is this an SMP system?
Ingo - 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/
| |