From: "Iain Sandoe" <iain@sandoe.co.uk>
To: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@norran.net>
Cc: linux-audio-dev@ginette.musique.umontreal.ca,
linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] [ANN] First latency test results for linuxPPC [2.2.17pre10-ben2]
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 22:48:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200007142149.WAA03525@hyperion.valhalla.net> (raw)
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000, Roger Larsson wrote:
> Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> I've posted the results of Benno's latency tests applied to 2.2.17pre10-ben2
>> on LinuxPPC.
[...]
>> No big surprises - although the PPC /proc fs seems to be a little slower
>> than the x86 one...
>>
>> Working on 2.4.0-test4 & thence to Andrew's patches on LinuxPPC...
[...]
> The green ticks on X11 test are interesting - something with a higher
> prio than
> the SCHED_FIFO max takes the processor away from it and runs for more
> than 1 ms.
>
> The only thing that can do that is interrupt routines / back handlers...
> (try to find this one)
Yeah, I've got a concern there... I have Jun Sun's IRQ latency test code
ported. I'll re-do the patch and try it again.
I have a feeling that the first time through (with the IRQ code) I may have
made a mistake in the value of the freq of the VEA Timebase counter.
If this is true then the IRQ times for the PPC are truly awful on
occasions..
I.E. I had the freq as 300 MHz - but I think it is actually approx 18MHz.
If that is the case then there is/are something/some things that are holding
IRQs off for up to.... > 9 or so ***ms*** Yikes.
I'll check this out tomorrow... but locating them might be hard because most
of the longer times are recorded in 'softira.c' & 'irq.c' - which doesn't
narrow things down much.
Expect a re-do of the IRQ patch tomorrow - and a request to try it out :-)
> Disk read looks nice - others looks ...
ummm /proc was the one that looked worst to me...
Iain.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next reply other threads:[~2000-07-14 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-07-14 21:48 Iain Sandoe [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-07-13 23:54 [ANN] First latency test results for linuxPPC [2.2.17pre10-ben2] Iain Sandoe
2000-07-14 18:47 ` [linux-audio-dev] " Roger Larsson
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=200007142149.WAA03525@hyperion.valhalla.net \
--to=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
--cc=linux-audio-dev@ginette.musique.umontreal.ca \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=roger.larsson@norran.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).