Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.10-rc1-mm3-V0.7.23
Date: Wed Nov 10 2004 - 12:39:00 EST
>you have to build another kernel for them. irqs-off and preempt-off
>timing can be mixed freely (and both can be enabled in the same kernel),
>but wakeup timing deserves its own .config space and since it's not
>mixable with the other two methods i didnt see much point in enabling
>all 3 at once with strange dependencies between them. Is this a big
>issue? Normally i think the wakeup timing is more than enough to get a
>feel of latencies, and if something specific is suspected the other ones
>can be turned on.
Just that it takes an hour or so to rebuild the kernel plus the
disk storage to keep two kernels instead of one.
The wakeup latencies I am seeing are all quite small, but the overhead
I am seeing at the application level have been quite high. Only 40 wakeup
latencies > 50 usec in a half hour of testing. I guess I'll build a
.24 without wakeup timing to see what kind of problems I'm having.
I can send you the wakeup timing traces if you are interested but
they are all really short (< 100 usec) or appear to indicate a hardware
contention problem (one step at 100 usec or so).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/