From: Jeff Angielski <jeff@theptrgroup.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Query regarding 2.6.335 RT[Ingo's] and Non-RT performance
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:53:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C64352F.4090005@theptrgroup.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikrpqFQsK=YLkHeWc1ZC=_Gz2rWStJrbQ8O-SrZ@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/11/2010 06:18 PM, Manikandan Ramachandran wrote:
> Hello All,
> I created a very simple program which has higher priority than
> normal tasks and runs a tight loop. Under same test environment I ran
> this program on both non-rt and rt 2.6.33.5 kernel. To my suprise I see
> that performance of non-RT kernel is better than RT. non-RT kernel took
> 3 sec and 366156 usec while RT kernel took about 3 sec and 418011
> usec.Can someone please explain why the performance of non-rt kernel is
> better than rt kernel? From the face of the test result, I feel RT has
> more overhead,Is there any configuration that I could do to bring down
> the overhead?
Your "surprise" is due to your definition of "performance".
The purpose of the -rt kernels is to reduce the kernel latency. This is
important for servicing hardware. Normal users find the -rt useful for
audio/video applications. Engineering and scientific users find the -rt
beneficially for servicing hardware like sensors or control systems.
If you are just trying to run calculations as fast as you can in user
space, you'd be better off using the non-rt variants.
--
Jeff Angielski
The PTR Group
www.theptrgroup.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-12 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-11 22:18 Query regarding 2.6.335 RT[Ingo's] and Non-RT performance Manikandan Ramachandran
2010-08-12 17:53 ` Jeff Angielski [this message]
2010-08-13 2:18 ` Xianghua Xiao
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-08-17 5:26 Manikandan Ramachandran
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=4C64352F.4090005@theptrgroup.com \
--to=jeff@theptrgroup.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
/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.