On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 8:16 AM Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 08:51:54AM +0100, Andrea Righi wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 10:44:33AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > > - with lazy RCU enabled hrtimer_interrupt() takes like 2x more to > > > > return, respect to the other cases (is this expected?) > > > > > > This last is surprising at first glance, but I could be missing > > > something. Joel, Uladzislau, thoughts? > > > > On this specific point, I repeated the tests with the latest 6.8 > > kernel and now I don't notice this difference anymore. > > > > hrtimer_interrupt() time is always in the range [4K, 16K) ns, both with > > lazy RCU off and lazy RCU on. > > > > I don't really know why I was getting different results, probably some > > noise triggered by something running in user-space...? > > > > In any case I will update my old post with these new results and I > > wouldn't consider this an issue for now. > > > Thank you for your confirmation, so our results are aligned in terms of > i also do not see the difference and issues with hrtimer_interrupt() > duration time. > Thanks Vlad and Andrea. That's a relief !!! ;-) - Joel
