[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: PREEMPT_RT vs ADEOS: the numbers, part 1

* Karim Yaghmour <> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > ok, this method should work fine. I suspect you increased the parport
> > IRQ's priority to the maximum on the PREEMPT_RT kernel, correct? Was
> > there any userspace thread on the target system (receiving the parport
> > request and sending the reply), or was it all done in a kernelspace
> > parport driver?
> This is all done in kernelspace. I'll check with Kristian for the
> rest. In the mean time, let me know if you have any recommendations
> based on the fact that it's indeed in the kernel.

if you want to measure hw-interrupt delays then under PREEMPT_RT you'll
need to use an SA_NODELAY interrupt handler. (which is a PREEMPT_RT
specific flag) If you use normal request_irq() or some parport driver
then the driver function will run in an interrupt thread and what you
are measuring is not interrupt latency but rescheduling latency.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-12 23:19    [W:0.063 / U:3.336 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site