Hi, all
I downloaded rt-preempt patch and hrt patch, after successfully compiled a new
kernel I ran the cyclictest three times each. As to rt vs. hrt, the result
seemed to be not that different as showed in Gleixner and Niehaus's OLS paper
"Hrtimers and Beyond: Transforming the Linux Time Subsystem."
Was my result below make sense? Or did I missed something?
Any comments and advices are welcome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* The following result is from the paper:
All tests have been run on a Pentium III 400MHz based PC.
Test case: clock_nanosleep(TIME_ABSTIME), interval 10000 microseconds,
10000 loops, no load.
Commandline: cyclictest -t 1 -p 80 -n -i 10000 -l 10000
Kernel min max avg
2.6.16 24 4043 1989
2.6.16-hrt5 12 94 20
2.6.16-rt12 6 40 10
* Here is my result:
Celeron M 370 (1.5 GHZ) w/ 512M memory.
I turned on "HPET Timer Support" for all the three cases.
For rt, I chose "Complete real-time preemption".
kernel min max avg
2.6.16 8 4038 2027
8 4055 1990
8 4018 1991
2.6.16-hrt6 16 94 62
17 78 61
11 72 63
2.6.16-rt29 14 79 62
11 74 62
11 71 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rt-preempt patch:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/realtime-preempt/older/patch-2.6.16-rt29
hrt patch:
http://www.tglx.de/projects/hrtimers/2.6.16/patch-2.6.16-hrt6.patch
Cyclictest:
http://tglx.de/projects/misc/cyclictest/cyclictest-v0.11.tar.bz2
Thanks in advance,
D.L.
--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
