From: "Iain Sandoe" <iain@sandoe.co.uk>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <bh40@calva.net>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: [ANN] IRQ Latency tool 0.1.3 release.
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:53:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200007252153.WAA27683@hyperion.valhalla.net> (raw)
>>> I still haven't found the "hard-block" that is effecting the overall audio
>>> latency performance... ah well, back to the drawing board...
>>
>>Do you have IDE? The IDE driver turned out to be the major interrupt messing
>>problem on m68k, since it can disable interrupts for quite a while.
>
> We have some great IRQ blockers in Linux currently. IDE is one,
> especially in PIO mode where it disables IRQs by default during
[...]
Does this mean that there are already other tools to measure the IRQ
blocking?
To go back to the original problem:
running a sched_fifo based audio latency test (Benno Senoner's x86 version
with PPC patches) I was seeing 8-10ms 'inexplicable' scheduling spikes.
Someone postulated that this could be caused by IRQ blocking.
Hence the tool. However, on my set-up, using the same latency test the
spikes show - but there are no IRQ blocks of that length showing in the
measurement.
I therefore have to conclude that:
(a) The tool is missing something - please peruse and suggest if you have
time... I think that most stuff is covered (and I did cover the DataAccess &
InstructionAccess exceptions - although that is currently not enabled in the
patch I've posted).
(b) The effect is caused by some other phenomenon (which is my current
guess).
So, I'm going to have another look at the latency test to see what I can do
to narrow down the source of the problem (including checking what the test
does :-)
Iain,
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next reply other threads:[~2000-07-25 21:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-07-25 21:53 Iain Sandoe [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-07-26 18:42 [ANN] IRQ Latency tool 0.1.3 release Iain Sandoe
2000-07-25 18:29 Iain Sandoe
2000-07-24 22:44 Iain Sandoe
2000-07-25 12:15 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2000-07-25 18:23 ` Jun Sun
2000-07-25 21:39 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2000-07-26 11:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2000-07-28 10:13 ` Takashi Oe
2000-07-28 14:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=200007252153.WAA27683@hyperion.valhalla.net \
--to=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
--cc=bh40@calva.net \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.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 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).