linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Carsten Emde <C.Emde@osadl.org>
To: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: merge of real-time 2.6.33.9-rt31 with stable 2.6.33.13
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 13:10:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DCFB4AE.2070800@osadl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim68rrUkRi0r-5xo4T10r5ALgcQhg@mail.gmail.com>

John,

> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Thomas Gleixner<tglx@linutronix.de>  wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 May 2011, John Kacur wrote:
>>> I did some light testing merging 2.6.33.13 into real-time 2.6.33.9-rt31.
>>> In addition I cherry-picked 3c955b407a084810f57260d61548cc92c14bc627
>>> in order to compile on newer distros.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>> Here is the result of cyclic test on one machine
>>> sudo ./cyclictest -t32 -p 80 -n -i 10000 -l 10000
>>> policy: fifo: loadavg: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1/541 3759
>>>
>>> T: 0 ( 3728) P:80 I:10000 C:  10000 Min:      7 Act:  104 Avg:  114 Max:     470
>>
>> The numbers are weird. How does that compare to older kernels on that
>> machine with the same test?
>
> Note this was on a machine with a straight Fedora install, and no -rt
> packages or tuning. That being the case, the numbers are no better or
> worse than recent -rt kernels. I can get you numbers with the last
> kernel if you wish, on Monday. Perhaps Carsten would be interested in
> running his tests?
I created my own 2.6.33.13-rt31 kernel some days ago. It is running on a 
pretest machine in our farm (rack #1, slot #4) since then -> 
https://www.osadl.org/?id=994. For an overview about the kernels in the 
farm (ordered by kernel version and release) see -> 
https://www.osadl.org/?id=1001. Real-time and all other data before and 
after the kernel upgrade to 2.6.33.13-rt31 are indistinguishable between 
each other.

Nevertheless, it would be interesting to investigate the origin of the 
numbers Thomas (correctly IMHO) classified as weird. The average and the 
maximum latency could be from a Pentium 90, the minimum latency looks ok 
for a state-of-the-art processor. What machine is this and how did you 
manage to create such numbers? It doesn't look like SMIs were 
responsible for that since they normally increase the maximum, not the 
average. Was another task with prio 80 or higher running?

Thanks,
Carsten.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-15 11:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-14 15:59 merge of real-time 2.6.33.9-rt31 with stable 2.6.33.13 John Kacur
2011-05-14 16:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-15  8:54   ` John Kacur
2011-05-15 11:10     ` Carsten Emde [this message]
2011-05-18  7:52 ` John Kacur

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=4DCFB4AE.2070800@osadl.org \
    --to=c.emde@osadl.org \
    --cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).