From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 07:22:24 +0000 Subject: Re: Low-latency patches working GREAT (<2.9ms audio latency), see testresults ,but ISDN troubles Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sound@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 28 Aug 1999, Benno Senoner wrote: > - The disk performance decreases by 10-25% when I increase the CPU load > in the "latencytest" bench. (On light CPU load there are no disk > performance differences, maybe this is related to higher scheduling > overhead) just in case anyone misunderstood the above result (as i think many did). The 'CPU load' mentioned above is a _realtime process_ (unless Benno you changed the benchmark). This is a _good_ result. 'increase CPU load' simply means 'generate more RT load' - which in _this case_ might mean less disk performance - but the RT task asked for it in the first place. All in one: i can see no problem here. if a 'simple' CPU-user (non-RT) is getting more active there is no slowdown. -- mingo