From: Andre Pang <ozone@algorithm.com.au>
To: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, safemode@speakeasy.net,
Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de, iafilius@xs4all.nl,
ilsensine@inwind.it, george@mvista.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:22:21 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1001143341.117502.5311.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1000939458.3853.17.camel@phantasy> <1001131036.557760.4340.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au> <1001139027.1245.28.camel@phantasy>
In-Reply-To: <1001139027.1245.28.camel@phantasy>
On Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 02:10:18AM -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> > i did a test of it on linux-2.4.10-pre13 with Benno Senoner's
> > lowlatency program, which i hacked up a bit to output
> > /proc/latencytimes after each of the graphs. test results are at
> >
> > http://www.algorithm.com.au/hacking/linux-lowlatency/2.4.10-pre13-pes/
> >
> > and since i stared at the results in disbelief, i won't even try
> > to guess what's going on :). maybe you can make some sense of
> > it?
>
> Well, its not hard to decipher...and really, its actually fairly good.
> the latency test program is giving you a max latency of around 12ms in
> each test, which is OK.
arrgh! i just realised my script buggered up and was producing the same
graph for all the results. please have a look at the page again, sorry.
apart from that, i'm still confused. compared to other graphs produced
by the latencytest program, my system seems to have huge latencies.
unless i'm reading it wrongly, the graph is saying that i'm getting
latencies of up to 30ms, and a lot of overruns. compare this to
http://www.gardena.net/benno/linux/audio/2.4.0-test2/3x256.html
which shows latencytest on 2.4.0-test2, and
http://www.gardena.net/benno/linux/audio/2.2.10-p133-3x128/3x128.html
which are the results for latencytest on 2.2.10. admittedly these
kernels are much older, but i'm consistently getting far more latency
than those kernels. that's the bit i'm confused about :) i've tried
Andrew Morton's low-latency patches as well, to no avail. i've made
sure i've tuned my hard disks correctly, and i don't have any other
realtime processes running.
am i concerned with a different issue than the one you're addressing?
> the preemption-test patch is showing _MAX_ latencies of 0.8ms through
> 12ms. this is fine, too.
yep, i agree with that ... so why is latencytest showing scheduling
latencies of > 30ms? i get the feeling i'm confusing two different
issues here. from what i understand, /proc/latencytimes shows the
how long it takes for various functions in the kernel to finish, and
the latencytest result shows how long it takes for it to be
re-scheduled (represented by the white line on the graph).
--
#ozone/algorithm <ozone@algorithm.com.au> - trust.in.love.to.save
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-22 7:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-19 22:44 [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Robert Love
2001-09-20 1:40 ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-20 2:23 ` safemode
2001-09-20 1:13 ` David Lang
2001-09-20 2:57 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 2:38 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 6:31 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-20 6:31 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-20 20:27 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109202111.f8KLBgG16833@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-20 22:09 ` [PATCH] Preemption patch 2.4.9-ac12 Robert Love
[not found] ` <20010920063143.424BD1E41A@Cantor.suse.de>
2001-09-20 6:41 ` [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 7:57 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <20010920075751.6CA791E6B2@Cantor.suse.de>
2001-09-20 8:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 20:13 ` george anzinger
2001-09-20 20:38 ` Randy.Dunlap
2001-09-20 21:10 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 21:35 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-20 22:03 ` Oliver Xymoron
2001-09-20 22:51 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109202252.f8KMqLG17327@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-21 3:17 ` Robert Love
2001-09-21 15:48 ` george anzinger
2001-09-22 21:09 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-22 23:40 ` safemode
2001-09-22 23:46 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-23 0:15 ` safemode
[not found] ` <200109222340.BAA37547@blipp.internet5.net>
2001-09-23 0:38 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-23 1:42 ` safemode
2001-09-23 3:02 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 16:43 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-23 0:42 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109222341.f8MNfnG25152@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:50 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 3:14 ` george anzinger
2001-09-23 4:06 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109222347.f8MNlMG25157@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:54 ` Robert Love
2001-09-27 0:02 ` [reiserfs-list] " Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109230016.f8N0G6G25222@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:58 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109222120.f8MLKYG24859@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:44 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109200757.JAA60995@blipp.internet5.net>
2001-09-20 17:37 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-20 21:29 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 21:53 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109200758.f8K7wEG13675@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-20 21:09 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 20:01 ` Tobias Diedrich
2001-09-20 22:01 ` Robert Love
2001-09-22 3:57 ` Andre Pang
2001-09-22 6:10 ` Robert Love
2001-09-22 7:22 ` Andre Pang [this message]
2001-09-23 3:18 ` george anzinger
2001-09-23 3:21 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 7:05 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 12:03 ` Andre Pang
2001-09-23 18:31 ` Robert Love
2001-09-22 12:56 ` ksoftirqd? (Was: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool) Roger Larsson
2001-09-22 13:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-22 20:51 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-22 21:33 ` Andrea Arcangeli
[not found] <200109202253.RAA21082@waste.org>
2001-09-20 23:15 ` [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Oliver Xymoron
2001-09-21 0:42 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 1:03 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-21 1:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-21 1:51 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-21 1:38 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 1:53 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 2:08 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 2:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-21 16:24 ` Jussi Laako
2001-09-21 16:36 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-21 18:46 ` Thomas Sailer
2001-09-22 10:30 ` Jussi Laako
2001-09-21 16:18 ` Stefan Westerfeld
2001-09-21 20:18 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109212018.f8LKImG21229@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-21 21:47 ` Robert Love
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-09 5:23 [PATCH] preemption latency measurement tool Robert Love
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=1001143341.117502.5311.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au \
--to=ozone@algorithm.com.au \
--cc=Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=iafilius@xs4all.nl \
--cc=ilsensine@inwind.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=safemode@speakeasy.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