public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Doug Niehaus <niehaus@ittc.ku.edu>,
	Benedikt Spranger <bene@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: High resolution timers and BH processing on -RT
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:43:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050128044301.GD29751@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1106871192.21196.152.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de>


* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:

> Some numbers to make this more transparent.
> 
> Machine: PIII Celeron 333MHz
> RT - T0: 1ms cyclic
> RT - T1: 2ms cyclic
> ....
> 
> Load average is ~4.0 for all tests. The numbers are maximum deviation
> from the timeline in microseconds. Test time was ~60 minutes for each
> szenario.
> 
> Running all timers in high resolution mode (ksoftirqd) results in:
> [T0  Prio:  60]  2123
> [T1  Prio:  59]  2556
> [T2  Prio:  58]  2882
> [T3  Prio:  57]  2993
> [T4  Prio:  56]  2888
> 
> Running all timers in high resolution mode (seperated timer softirqd
> PRIO=70) results in:
> [T0  Prio:  60]  423
> [T1  Prio:  59]  372
> [T2  Prio:  58]  756
> [T3  Prio:  57]  802
> [T4  Prio:  56]  1208

is this due to algorithmic/PIT-programming overhead, or due to the noise
introduced by other, non-hard-RT timers? I'd guess the later from the
looks of it, but did your test introduce such noise (via networking and
application workloads?).

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-28  4:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-01-28  0:13 High resolution timers and BH processing on -RT Thomas Gleixner
2005-01-28  4:43 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2005-01-28  8:20   ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-01-28  8:24     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-28  8:30       ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-01-28  8:47         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-28 18:34           ` George Anzinger
2005-01-28 18:51             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-28 18:53             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-31  9:12             ` Thomas Gleixner

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=20050128044301.GD29751@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=bene@linutronix.de \
    --cc=george@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=niehaus@ittc.ku.edu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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