public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Kristian Benoit <kbenoit@opersys.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@us.ibm.com, bhuey@lnxw.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de, pmarques@grupopie.com, bruce@andrew.cmu.edu,
	nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, ak@muc.de, sdietrich@mvista.com,
	dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org,
	rpm@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RT and I-PIPE: the numbers, part 4
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 07:25:31 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <42D2572B.8070103@opersys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050711070516.GA2238@elte.hu>


Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So why do your "ping flood" results show such difference? It really is 
> just another type of interrupt workload and has nothing special in it.
...
> are you suggesting this is not really a benchmark but a way to test how 
> well a particular system withholds against extreme external load?

Look, you're basically splitting hairs. No matter how involved an explanation
you can provide, it remains that both vanilla and I-pipe were subject to the
same load. If PREEMPT_RT consistently shows the same degradation under the
same setup, and that is indeed the case, then the problem is with PREEMPT_RT,
not the tests.

> so you can see ping packet flow fluctuations in your tests? Then you 
> cannot use those results as any sort of benchmark metric.

I didn't say this. I said that if fluctuation there is, then maybe this is
something we want to see the effect of. In real world applications,
interrupts may not come in at a steady pace, as you try to achieve in your
own tests.

> and from this point on you should see zero lmbench overhead from flood 
> pinging. Can vanilla or I-PIPE do that?

Let's not get into what I-pipe can or cannot do, that's not what these
numbers are about. It's pretty darn amazing that we're even having this
conversation. The PREEMPT_RT stuff is being worked on by more than a
dozen developers spread accross some of the most well-known Linux companies
out there (RedHat, MontaVista, IBM, TimeSys, etc.). Yet, despite this
massive involvement, here we have a patch developed by a single guy,
Philippe, who's doing this work outside his regular work hours, and his
patch, which does provide guaranteed deterministic behavior, is:
a) Much smaller than PREEMPT_RT
b) Less intrusive than PREEMPT_RT
c) Performs very well, as-good-as if not sometimes even better than PREEMPT_RT

Splitting hairs won't erase this reality. And again, before the I get the
PREEMPT_RT mob again on my back, this is just for the sake of argument,
both approaches remain valid, and are not mutually exclusive.

Like I said before, others are free to publish their own numbers showing
differently from what we've found.

Karim
-- 
Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits
http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546


  reply	other threads:[~2005-07-11 11:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-07-08 23:01 PREEMPT_RT and I-PIPE: the numbers, part 4 Kristian Benoit
2005-07-09  1:28 ` Karim Yaghmour
2005-07-09  7:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-09 15:39   ` Karim Yaghmour
2005-07-09 15:53     ` Karim Yaghmour
2005-07-09 15:53       ` Karim Yaghmour
2005-07-11  7:05     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-11 11:25       ` Karim Yaghmour [this message]
2005-07-09 17:22   ` Daniel Walker
2005-07-09 23:37     ` Bill Huey
2005-07-09  9:01 ` Paul Rolland
2005-07-09 14:47   ` Karim Yaghmour
2005-07-09 15:22   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-11  5:24 ` Ingo Molnar

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=42D2572B.8070103@opersys.com \
    --to=karim@opersys.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=bhuey@lnxw.com \
    --cc=bruce@andrew.cmu.edu \
    --cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=kbenoit@opersys.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=pmarques@grupopie.com \
    --cc=rpm@xenomai.org \
    --cc=sdietrich@mvista.com \
    --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