Re: 2.6.33.7-rt29 PREEMPT_RT worse latency than PREEMPT_DESKTOP on AT91?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 15 Sep 2010, Agustin Ferrin Pozuelo wrote:
>  On 27/08/10 11:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Agustin Ferrin Pozuelo wrote:
> Sorry, my test setup is not very comprehensive at the moment. I have some
> overnight/overweekend results at hand with millions of loops:
> 
>     PREEMPT-DESKTOP:
>     root@at91sam9263cpc:~# time cyclictest -i 70000 -p 80 -h 700 -r

Oh, you are running cyclictest with a signal based timer and relative
time. Any reason for this ?

What happens if you change the command line to

   cyclictest -i 70000 -p 80 -n

> I am assuming context switching is more expensive on PREEMPT-RT under ARM9,
> where it seems already a bit expensive.

No, the context switch is equally expensive, but signal delivery might
be a bit more overhead on -RT

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [RT Stable]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux