From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Cochran Subject: Re: [RFC v2 net-next 00/10] Time based packet transmission Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:26:01 -0800 Message-ID: <20180123052601.oqrh3cnwfpoxmsdg@localhost> References: <20180117230621.26074-1-jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com> <20180123052327.sxr63h3wmva4fvm4@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, vinicius.gomes@intel.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, anna-maria@linutronix.de, henrik@austad.us, tglx@linutronix.de, john.stultz@linaro.org, andre.guedes@intel.com, ivan.briano@intel.com, levi.pearson@harman.com To: Jesus Sanchez-Palencia Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:40912 "EHLO mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750756AbeAWF0E (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:26:04 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f67.google.com with SMTP id g16so8917164pgn.7 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:26:04 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180123052327.sxr63h3wmva4fvm4@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:23:27PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 03:06:11PM -0800, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia wrote: > > First, a baseline test was ran for 10 minutes with the plain kernel only: > > > > | | plain kernel @ 1ms | > > |-----------------+--------------------+ > > | min (ns): | +4.820000e+02 | > > | max (ns): | +9.999300e+05 | > > | pk-pk: | +9.994480e+05 | > > ... > > > | | tbs SW @ 1ms | tbs HW @ 1ms | tbs HW @ 250 us | > > |-----------------+-------------------+----------------+-----------------| > > | min (ns): | +1.510000e+02 | +4.420000e+02 | +4.260000e+02 | > > | max (ns): | +9.977030e+05 | +5.060000e+02 | +5.060000e+02 | > > | pk-pk: | +9.975520e+05 | +6.400000e+01 | +8.000000e+01 | > > I wonder about these worst case measurements of 999 and 998 > milliseconds. It almost looks like you missed one entire period. ^^^^ microseconds > Could this simply be a bug in the test setup? > > Thanks, > Richard