From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4B379DFC.6000800@domain.hid> Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:48:44 +0100 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <27218735.319731261932640576.JavaMail.coremail@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <27218735.319731261932640576.JavaMail.coremail@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] test result on at91rm9200 List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: robert165 Cc: xenomai-help robert165 wrote: > Hi, > I have tested xenomai on my at91rm9200 board, I used > xenomai 2.4.10 + linux-2.6.28 + adeos-ipipe-2.6.28-arm-1.12-05.patch > Test result seems very poor, is that correct? Your test results are rather good for an at91rm9200 board, which is the sure sign that you are not loading the system enough. As I already told, you, the expected results are: - user-space latency of 260us without FCSE - user-space latency of 200us with FCSE - kernel-space latency of 50us if running with unlocked context switches (an option which is only available in the upcoming 2.5 branch). > And is there any introduction of the tests, as their purper, their > meanling... The latency test computes some latencies (either user-space scheduling latency, kernel-space scheduling latency, or kernel-space interrupt latency, depending on the options). The switchtest tests context switches. The switchbench measures context switching time. cyclictest does the same thing as the latency test (only, you need to run it with the right options to avoid running in fact with Linux timer), and in general return similar results. Here I do not know what is the meaning of cyclictest results you got, but if you want to know, I am afraid you wil have to investigate, or simply ignore them. > > Test is under loads as followed, > dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null > /dev/null & > ping 172.18.23.10 > /dev/null & > while ls; do ls; done > /dev/null & This load is laughable. Do you find that they really stress the system, that they make it really unresponsive? Do you really expect a test which sends one packet every second over network to stress the system in some way? That is what I meant when I said hammering the system real hard. -- Gilles.