All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robbie VanVossen <robert.vanvossen@dornerworks.com>
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: Pavlo Suikov <pavlo.suikov@globallogic.com>,
	Nate Studer <nate.studer@dornerworks.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: Delays on usleep calls
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:09:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52FD349F.8070101@dornerworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1391764936.9917.58.camel@Solace>

On 2/7/2014 4:22 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> From your experiments (an from some other numbers I also have) it looks 
> like this lower bound is not terrible in Xen, which is something good to
> know... So thanks again for taking the time of running the benchmarks
> and sharing the results! :-D
> 
> That being said, especially if we compare to baremetal, I think there is
> some room for improvements (I mean, there always will be an overhead,
> but still...). Do you, by any chance, have the figures for cyclictest on
> Linux baremetal too (on the same hardware and kernel, if possible)?

Dario,

Here is an updated table:

+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
| Config | Domain | Scheduler |   Latency (us)    |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
|        |        |           | Min |   Max | Avg |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
| 0      | NA     | CFS       |   4 |    35 |  10 |
| 1      | 0      | Arinc653  |  20 |   163 |  68 |
| 2      | 0      | Arinc653  |  21 |   173 |  68 |
| 3      | 0      | Credit    |  23 |  1041 |  87 |
| 3      | 1      | Arinc653  |  20 |   155 |  75 |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+

Configuration 0 is the same kernel as before, but running on baremetal, as
requested. As expected, these values are lower than the other results. I also
added the results of running cyclictest on dom0 in configuration 3. In this
configuration, dom0 was running the credit schedule in a separate CPU-Pool from
the guest.


On another note, I attempted to get the same measurements for a linux kernel
with the Real Time Patch applied. Here are the results:

-------------------
Configuration 0 - Bare Metal Kernel

Ubuntu 12.04.1 - Linux 3.2.24-rt38

-------------------
Configuration 1 - Only Domain-0

Xen: 		4.4-rc2 - Arinc653 Scheduler
Domain-0: 	Ubuntu 12.04.1 - Linux 3.2.24-rt38

xl list -n:
Name             ID   Mem  VCPUs   State  Time(s)  NODE Affinity
Domain-0          0  1535      1  r-----     30.9  all

xl vcpu-list:
Name             ID  VCPU  CPU  State  Time(s)  CPU Affinity
Domain-0          0     0    0    r--     35.5  all

-------------------
Configuration 2 - Domain-0 and Unscheduled guest

Xen: 		4.4-rc2 - Arinc653 Scheduler
Domain-0: 	Ubuntu 12.04.1 - Linux 3.2.24-rt38
dom1: 		Ubuntu 12.04.1 - Linux 3.2.24-rt38

xl list -n:
Name             ID   Mem  VCPUs   State  Time(s)  NODE Affinity
Domain-0          0  1535      1  r-----     39.7  all
dom1              1   512      1  ------      0.0  all

xl vcpu-list:
Name             ID  VCPU  CPU  State  Time(s)  CPU Affinity
Domain-0          0     0    0    r--     40.5  all
dom1              1     0    0    ---      0.0  all

-------------------
Command used:

cyclictest -t1 -p 1 -i 30000 -l 500 -q

Results:
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
| Config | Domain | Scheduler |   Latency (us)    |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
|        |        |           | Min |   Max | Avg |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+
| 0      | NA     | CFS       |   3 |     8 |   5 |
| 1      | 0      | Arinc653  |  20 |   160 |  68 |
| 2      | 0      | Arinc653  |  18 |   150 |  66 |
+--------+--------+-----------+-----+-------+-----+

I couldn't seem to boot into the guest using the kernel with the Real Time Patch
applied, which is why I didn't replicate configuration 3.

-- 
---
Robbie VanVossen
DornerWorks, Ltd.
Embedded Systems Engineering

      reply	other threads:[~2014-02-13 21:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-20 14:10 Delays on usleep calls Pavlo Suikov
2014-01-20 15:05 ` Dario Faggioli
2014-01-20 16:05   ` Pavlo Suikov
2014-01-20 17:31     ` Pavlo Suikov
2014-01-21 10:56       ` Dario Faggioli
2014-01-21 11:46     ` Dario Faggioli
2014-01-21 15:53       ` Pavlo Suikov
2014-01-21 17:56         ` Dario Faggioli
2014-01-23 19:09           ` Pavlo Suikov
2014-01-24 17:08             ` Dario Faggioli
2014-02-05 21:30   ` Robbie VanVossen
2014-02-07  9:22     ` Dario Faggioli
2014-02-13 21:09       ` Robbie VanVossen [this message]

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=52FD349F.8070101@dornerworks.com \
    --to=robert.vanvossen@dornerworks.com \
    --cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
    --cc=nate.studer@dornerworks.com \
    --cc=pavlo.suikov@globallogic.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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.