public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ck@vds.kolivas.org
Subject: Re: Interbench real time benchmark results
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 00:32:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050719223216.GA4194@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200507200816.11386.kernel@kolivas.org>


* Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:

> Not entirely what some would expect. Very little difference under low 
> loads, but the maximum latencies exhibited are about the same at 
> 300us. However they hare under different workloads. With these 
> worklods, on this hardware, running these real time simulations there 
> is not a convincing argument for CONFIG-PREEMPT. Note that running 
> interbench with the non-real time benchmarks also does not show a 
> convincing reason for preempt.

while i do like the PREEMPT_RT results, i think we need to do two more 
things to have total confidence in the numbers:

 - i think we'll need to increase the number of sample points, by both
   increasing the frequency of samples, and by lengthening the
   test-time - even if just for a single testrun. Some of the worst-case 
   latencies i care about in PREEMPT_RT trigger only once every couple 
   of million interrupts (!). For human interactivity we probably dont 
   care that much though.

 - many of the worst-case latencies relate to some sort of extreme 
   situation within a particular algorithm. E.g. lots of tasks being 
   around. Do this for example:

	hackbench 50

   and Ctrl-Z it after a couple of seconds. You'll see a 1msec (or 
   larger) blip.

   or, fill up swapspace, so that the swap allocation map gets filled
   up.

 - networking is another frequent source of latencies - it might make 
   sense to add a workload doing lots of socket IO. (localhost might be 
   enough, but not for everything)

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2005-07-19 22:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-07-19 22:16 Interbench real time benchmark results Con Kolivas
2005-07-19 22:32 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2005-07-20  0:23   ` Daniel Walker
2005-07-20  1:04     ` Con Kolivas
2005-07-20  1:22       ` Daniel Walker
2005-07-20  1:31         ` Jesper Juhl
2005-07-20  1:45           ` Con Kolivas
2005-07-21  4:48         ` 2.6.12 PREEMPT_RT && PPC john cooper
2005-07-21 11:45           ` Gene Heskett
2005-07-21 12:22             ` Gene Heskett
2005-07-21 13:13             ` john cooper
2005-07-26 12:00           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-26 14:44             ` K.R. Foley
2005-07-26 14:55               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-26 15:06                 ` K.R. Foley
2005-07-20  0:23 ` Interbench real time benchmark results Daniel Walker
2005-07-20  4:59 ` Lee Revell

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=20050719223216.GA4194@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
    --cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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