public inbox for linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* rt-tests-0.82 available on github
@ 2011-09-21 20:54 Clark Williams
  2011-09-21 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Clark Williams @ 2011-09-21 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: RT; +Cc: LKML, Carsten Emde, Uwe Kleine-König, Thomas Gleixner,
	John Kacur

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1694 bytes --]

While kernel.org is sorting out the security stuff, the rt-tests code
may be pulled from:

	git://github.com/clrkwllms/rt-tests.git

Note that we're now at version 0.82. Presently I only have the git
archive available (no tarballs). 

While investigating latency spikes in the 3.0.x-rt kernels, Thomas
spotted a case where an Intel quad-core Xeon was going into deep
sleep states and were all fighting to come out of sleep at the same
time (and consequently causing a big latency spike in cyclictest). 

While trying to figure out how to prevent deep cstates I remembered a
conversation I had with Arjan at the last Plumbers conference in
Boston. He mentioned the /dev/cpu_dma_latency interface to the power
managment code and that if you opened it and wrote a zero to it, you
effectively put the system into "idle=poll" mode until you closed the
file descriptor (see: Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt). 

I've added a set_latency_target() function to cyclictest that by
default opens /dev/cpu_dma_latency and writes a zero to it, then holds
the file descriptor open for the duration of the cyclictest run. This
made a *huge* difference on some Intel Xeon's. Without this option, when
I was running cyclictest with the -b option, I saw latencies over
300us. When I added it, while tracing I never saw a latency over 30us.
Turning of -b, I never saw it go over 10us. I am doing further testing
now with other x86_64 systems. 

Of course this is very architecture specific, so YMMV, but I think it's
a valid mechanism to be used when measuring latency and I believe a
technique that many latency-sensitive applications might use to good
effect. 

Clark

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: rt-tests-0.82 available on github
  2011-09-21 20:54 rt-tests-0.82 available on github Clark Williams
@ 2011-09-21 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-09-21 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Clark Williams; +Cc: RT, LKML, Carsten Emde, Uwe Kleine-König, John Kacur

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Clark Williams wrote:

> While kernel.org is sorting out the security stuff, the rt-tests code
> may be pulled from:
> 
> 	git://github.com/clrkwllms/rt-tests.git
> 
> Note that we're now at version 0.82. Presently I only have the git
> archive available (no tarballs). 
> 
> While investigating latency spikes in the 3.0.x-rt kernels, Thomas
> spotted a case where an Intel quad-core Xeon was going into deep
> sleep states and were all fighting to come out of sleep at the same
> time (and consequently causing a big latency spike in cyclictest). 
> 
> While trying to figure out how to prevent deep cstates I remembered a
> conversation I had with Arjan at the last Plumbers conference in
> Boston. He mentioned the /dev/cpu_dma_latency interface to the power
> managment code and that if you opened it and wrote a zero to it, you
> effectively put the system into "idle=poll" mode until you closed the
> file descriptor (see: Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.txt). 
> 
> I've added a set_latency_target() function to cyclictest that by
> default opens /dev/cpu_dma_latency and writes a zero to it, then holds
> the file descriptor open for the duration of the cyclictest run. This
> made a *huge* difference on some Intel Xeon's. Without this option, when
> I was running cyclictest with the -b option, I saw latencies over
> 300us. When I added it, while tracing I never saw a latency over 30us.
> Turning of -b, I never saw it go over 10us. I am doing further testing
> now with other x86_64 systems. 
> 
> Of course this is very architecture specific, so YMMV, but I think it's
> a valid mechanism to be used when measuring latency and I believe a
> technique that many latency-sensitive applications might use to good
> effect. 

This is not a big surprise as the kernel got more agressive going into
deep C-states since 2.6.33-rt especially with "intel_idle" on modern
(Nehalem+) cpus.

Thanks,

	tglx

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-09-21 21:24 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-09-21 20:54 rt-tests-0.82 available on github Clark Williams
2011-09-21 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox