From: Eugene Surovegin <ebs@ebshome.net>
To: Zajac Adam-AAZ004 <Adam.Zajac@motorola.com>
Cc: "'linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org'" <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: Help on tuning the Linux kernel for soft real-time requirements
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:00:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041018220055.GA8713@gate.ebshome.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EFB813091B18D511BD3600508B644F820A6181E7@tx14exm06.ftw.mot.com>
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 04:30:54PM -0500, Zajac Adam-AAZ004 wrote:
> I'm seeking any help on tuning the Linux kernel running in an embedded
> environment to meet some of the soft real-time requirements that we have for
> our platform.
> Our custom board is based on PPC MPC8540 processor and it runs kernel 2.4.20
> with the low-latency patch and kernel preemption enabled. The applications
> running on that board keep experiencing a "task starvation" scenario, which
> leads to missing soft real-time deadline requirements.
>
> We've tried to prioritize the applications that needed to meet these soft
> real-time deadlines above other "background" tasks performing unarchiving
> operations (gzip + tar) through the means of adjusting dynamic as well as
> static priorities. Dynamic priorities were assigned through "nice()"
> function and static priorities were assigned for the round robin policy of
> the scheduler through "sched_setscheduler()". We've pretty much exhausted
> all combinations of the priority assignments without finding the right
> configuration that would satisfy both soft real-time deadlines and overall
> system performance requirements.
> Soft real-time deadlines are being missed during unarchiving procedures.
>
> Any hints and ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Could you elaborate a little on what those soft-realtime requirements
are? Are they sub-millisecond, milliseconds ...?
FWIW, I use 2.4.21 kernel + preempt patch (MV one, _NOT_ from rml
patches), low-lat, O(1) scheduler and HZ = 1000.
Thread with real-time priority (any, all other threads run with
SCHED_OTHER) and FIFO scheduler doing 10ms sleep runs pretty robust on
440 hardware. During worst case scenario - heavy disk (SCSI)
activity, I'm seeing rare sleeps up to 18-20ms.
--
Eugene
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-18 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-18 21:30 Help on tuning the Linux kernel for soft real-time requirements Zajac Adam-AAZ004
2004-10-18 22:00 ` Eugene Surovegin [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-22 19:47 VanBaren, Gerald (AGRE)
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=20041018220055.GA8713@gate.ebshome.net \
--to=ebs@ebshome.net \
--cc=Adam.Zajac@motorola.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.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).