From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: v2.6.19-rt6, yum/rpm Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 22:44:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20061207214434.GA29357@elte.hu> References: <20061205171114.GA25926@elte.hu> <1165524358.9244.33.camel@cmn3.stanford.edu> <20061207205819.GA21953@elte.hu> <1165526445.27217.59.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Fernando Lopez-Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith , Clark Williams , Sergei Shtylyov , Thomas Gleixner , Giandomenico De Tullio Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:41938 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1163449AbWLGVpq (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2006 16:45:46 -0500 To: Arjan van de Ven Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1165526445.27217.59.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org * Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > i think it's the UP vs. SMP difference. We are chasing some SMP > > latencies right now that trigger on boxes that have deeper C sleep > > states. idle=poll seems to work around those problems. > > well C-states do cause latencies... as advertized in the > /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/power file. no, this is a plain logic bug somewhere, not a hardware latency. Sometimes the latency is in the seconds range, etc. Ingo