From: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Xenomai <xenomai@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [libevl][PATCH 2/2] tests: sched-quota-accuracy: Add preempting FIFO thread
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2026 13:17:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87jyrta2c2.fsf@xenomai.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87cxxlbik5.fsf@xenomai.org> (Philippe Gerum's message of "Sat, 20 Jun 2026 12:41:14 +0200")
Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org> writes:
> Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> writes:
>
>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
>>
>> Test that higher-prio SCHED_FIFO threads do not run on the bill of
>> SCHED_QUOTA threads and that their accounting is not otherwise
>> disturbed.
>>
>
> This patch introduced a regression when determining the accuracy of the
> policy with respect to allotting threads the expected runtime budget:
>
> root@phytec-mira-evl:~# evl test sched-quota-accuracy
> sched-quota-accuracy: 494.0%
>
> The proper result would rather be close to the following:
>
> root@phytec-mira-evl:~# evl test sched-quota-accuracy
> sched-quota-accuracy: 99.1%
Ok, I guess the fact that the calibration process does not factor in the
disruptor explains the full breakage we have with the accounting now:
root@phytec-mira-evl:~# evl test sched-quota-accuracy -- -v
picked CPU1 for execution
CPU1: calibrating: 893547 loops/sec
CPU1: new thread group #0, quota sum is 10%
CPU1: done quota_thread[0], count=150399
CPU1: done quota_thread[1], count=145636
CPU1: done quota_thread[2], count=141552
CPU1: 3 threads: cap=10%, effective=49.0%, disruption=49.6%
sched-quota-accuracy: 489.7%
Which does not make any sense since the effective value should be capped
at 10% in the above case, compared to the nominal (full) report which
should be:
root@phytec-mira-evl:~# evl test sched-quota-accuracy -- -v
picked CPU1 for execution
CPU1: calibrating: 899203 loops/sec
CPU1: new thread group #0, quota sum is 10%
CPU1: done quota_thread[0], count=26818
CPU1: done quota_thread[1], count=26709
CPU1: done quota_thread[2], count=35612
CPU1: 3 threads: cap=10%, effective=9.9%
sched-quota-accuracy: 99.1%
Dropping this patch from the -next branch for now.
--
Philippe.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-20 11:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-14 19:36 [libevl][PATCH 1/2] tests: sched-quota-accuracy: Augment workload with busy-spinning Jan Kiszka
2026-06-14 19:37 ` [libevl][PATCH 2/2] tests: sched-quota-accuracy: Add preempting FIFO thread Jan Kiszka
2026-06-16 6:09 ` Philippe Gerum
2026-06-20 10:41 ` Philippe Gerum
2026-06-20 11:17 ` Philippe Gerum [this message]
2026-06-20 12:40 ` Jan Kiszka
2026-07-08 8:03 ` Jan Kiszka
2026-07-08 9:05 ` Philippe Gerum
2026-07-20 18:48 ` Philippe Gerum
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=87jyrta2c2.fsf@xenomai.org \
--to=rpm@xenomai.org \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=xenomai@lists.linux.dev \
/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