Clark Williams schrieb:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:32:54 +0100
Max Müller <mxmr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I'd say you're doing pretty good keeping under 50us. You might want to
try it under a heavier load than the shell script you've been running.
If you don't want to fool with rteval, try kicking off a kernel compile
in another window like this:
$ while true; do make -j4 clean bzImage modules; done
and then run cyclictest. A kernel compile with parallel jobs (-j) is a
good overall load of computation and I/O.
I tested now like you told me with irqbalance and cpuspeed services
disabled. I hope i made the right for disabling irqbalance, i used the
kernel parameter acpi_no_irqbalance. Is this correct? Unfortunately the
results were nearly equal as before.
I don't think you're going to get much better results on the Atom. I
have an MSI Nettop box with the dual-core version and I saw about the
same results as you.
What sort of scheduling deadlines are you trying to meet?
Clark
Shorter it is better it would be :-)
I can also live with this results, but i wanted to make sure to get the
best out of this hardware.
Are you running both cores on the MSI box (maybe also with
hyperthreading enabled) with this results?
In the meantime i thought also if the SMI (system management mode) could
have a bad influence. I wrote a little userspace programm which
disables global SMI bit of the ICH7 southbridge. But also no better
results.
After that i was told (thanks to Luis Claudio!) to check latency with
the kernel module hwlat_detector. The results of this module was 0. I
interpreted this that there is no SMI that causes the latency on my ATOM
system.
Regards,
Max
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
