* [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test
@ 2006-11-09 13:36 Matthias Fechner
2006-11-09 14:04 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2006-11-09 14:12 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matthias Fechner @ 2006-11-09 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai
Hi,
I tested today Xenomai on my AMD64 (32-bit mode) with the latency
program from the testsuite and I got for lat min negative values.
Can my computer predict the future? :)
How can I interpret these values?
100 us
== Test mode: periodic user-mode task
== All results in microseconds
warming up...
RTT| 00:00:01 (periodic user-mode task, 100 us period, priority 99)
RTH|-----lat min|-----lat avg|-----lat max|-overrun|----lat best|---lat worst
RTD| -1.337| -0.958| 0.970| 0| -1.337| 0.970
RTD| -1.290| -0.907| 1.959| 0| -1.337| 1.959
...
RTD| -1.406| -0.923| 1.884| 0| -1.468| 4.358
---|------------|------------|------------|--------|-------------------------
RTS| -1.468| -0.922| 4.358| 0| 00:00:34/00:00:34
Best regards,
Matthias
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." --
Rich Cook
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test
2006-11-09 13:36 [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test Matthias Fechner
@ 2006-11-09 14:04 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2006-11-09 18:36 ` Matthias Fechner
2006-11-09 14:12 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2006-11-09 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai
Matthias Fechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tested today Xenomai on my AMD64 (32-bit mode) with the latency
> program from the testsuite and I got for lat min negative values.
>
> Can my computer predict the future? :)
The expiration time of a timer is usually known in advance, so, in that
sense, your computer predicts the future.
>
> How can I interpret these values?
It means that Xenomai anticipates, that is, the timer is programmed
to tick a bit early in order to account for the interrupt and scheduling
latencies. In your case it is a bit too early, you can change this
anticipation time at compilation time with the configuration constant
CONFIG_OPT_TIMING_TIMERLAT and CONFIG_XENO_OPT_TIMING_SCHEDLAT, or
change it at run time by writing a new value in /proc/xenomai/latency.
--
Gilles Chanteperdrix
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test
2006-11-09 14:04 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2006-11-09 18:36 ` Matthias Fechner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matthias Fechner @ 2006-11-09 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai
Hello Gilles and Wolfgang,
* Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org> [09-11-06 15:04]:
> It means that Xenomai anticipates, that is, the timer is programmed
> to tick a bit early in order to account for the interrupt and scheduling
> latencies. In your case it is a bit too early, you can change this
> anticipation time at compilation time with the configuration constant
> CONFIG_OPT_TIMING_TIMERLAT and CONFIG_XENO_OPT_TIMING_SCHEDLAT, or
> change it at run time by writing a new value in /proc/xenomai/latency.
ah ok thx a lot for that information.
Best regards,
Matthias
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." --
Rich Cook
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test
2006-11-09 13:36 [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test Matthias Fechner
2006-11-09 14:04 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2006-11-09 14:12 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Grandegger @ 2006-11-09 14:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai
Matthias Fechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tested today Xenomai on my AMD64 (32-bit mode) with the latency
> program from the testsuite and I got for lat min negative values.
>
> Can my computer predict the future? :)
Of course, the timer is programmed a bit in advance taking into account
some average latency, like code run time, HW latencies, etc. It is
system dependent.
> How can I interpret these values?
>
> 100 us
> == Test mode: periodic user-mode task
> == All results in microseconds
> warming up...
> RTT| 00:00:01 (periodic user-mode task, 100 us period, priority 99)
> RTH|-----lat min|-----lat avg|-----lat max|-overrun|----lat best|---lat worst
> RTD| -1.337| -0.958| 0.970| 0| -1.337| 0.970
> RTD| -1.290| -0.907| 1.959| 0| -1.337| 1.959
> ...
> RTD| -1.406| -0.923| 1.884| 0| -1.468| 4.358
> ---|------------|------------|------------|--------|-------------------------
> RTS| -1.468| -0.922| 4.358| 0| 00:00:34/00:00:34
Add the value listed by 'cat /proc/xenomai/latency` to the above figures
or set the latency to "1 ns" with 'echo "1" > /proc/xenomai/latency'.
Wolfgang.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-11-09 18:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-11-09 13:36 [Xenomai-help] Strange results with latency test Matthias Fechner
2006-11-09 14:04 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2006-11-09 18:36 ` Matthias Fechner
2006-11-09 14:12 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
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.