All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Iain Sandoe" <iain@sandoe.co.uk>
To: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@norran.net>
Cc: linux-audio-dev@ginette.musique.umontreal.ca,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] [ANN] First latency test results for linuxPPC  [2.2.17pre10-ben2]
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 22:48:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200007142149.WAA03525@hyperion.valhalla.net> (raw)


On  Fri, Jul 14, 2000, Roger Larsson wrote:
> Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> I've posted the results of Benno's latency tests applied to 2.2.17pre10-ben2
>> on LinuxPPC.
[...]
>> No big surprises - although the PPC /proc fs seems to be a little slower
>> than the x86 one...
>>
>> Working on 2.4.0-test4 & thence to Andrew's patches on LinuxPPC...
[...]
> The green ticks on X11 test are interesting - something with a higher
> prio than
> the SCHED_FIFO max takes the processor away from it and runs for more
> than 1 ms.
>
> The only thing that can do that is interrupt routines / back handlers...
> (try to find this one)

Yeah, I've got a concern there... I have Jun Sun's IRQ latency test code
ported.  I'll re-do the patch and try it again.

I have a feeling that the first time through (with the IRQ code) I may have
made a mistake in the value of the freq of the VEA Timebase counter.

If this is true then the IRQ times for the PPC are truly awful on
occasions..

I.E. I had the freq as 300 MHz - but I think it is actually approx 18MHz.

If that is the case then there is/are something/some things that are holding
IRQs off for up to.... > 9 or so ***ms***  Yikes.

I'll check this out tomorrow... but locating them might be hard because most
of the longer times are recorded in 'softira.c' & 'irq.c' - which doesn't
narrow things down much.

Expect a re-do of the IRQ patch tomorrow - and a request to try it out :-)

> Disk read looks nice - others looks ...

ummm /proc was the one that looked worst to me...

Iain.

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

             reply	other threads:[~2000-07-14 21:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-07-14 21:48 Iain Sandoe [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-07-13 23:54 [ANN] First latency test results for linuxPPC [2.2.17pre10-ben2] Iain Sandoe
2000-07-14 18:47 ` [linux-audio-dev] " Roger Larsson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200007142149.WAA03525@hyperion.valhalla.net \
    --to=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-audio-dev@ginette.musique.umontreal.ca \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
    --cc=roger.larsson@norran.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.