Re: [ck] [PATCH][RFC] sched: Isochronous class for unprivileged softrt scheduling
From: Con Kolivas
Date: Tue Jan 18 2005 - 10:59:50 EST
Cal wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
Comments and testing welcome.
There's a collection of test summaries from jack_test3.2 runs at
<http://www.graggrag.com/ck-tests/ck-tests-0501182249.txt>
Tests were run with iso_cpu at 70, 90, 99, 100, each test was run twice.
The discrepancies between consecutive runs (with same parameters) is
puzzling. Also recorded were tests with SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR.
Before drawing any hardball conclusions, verification of the results
would be nice. At first glance, it does seem that we still have that
fateful gap between "harm minimisation" (policy) and "zero tolerance"
(audio reality requirement).
Thanks.
SCHED_ISO
/proc/sys/kernel/iso_cpu . . .: 70
/proc/sys/kernel/iso_period . : 5
XRUN Count . . . . . . . . . : 110
vs
SCHED_FIFO
XRUN Count . . . . . . . . . : 114
XRUN Count . . . . . . . . . : 187
vs
SCHED_RR
XRUN Count . . . . . . . . . : 0
XRUN Count . . . . . . . . . : 0
Something funny going on here... You had more xruns with SCHED_FIFO than
the default SCHED_ISO settings, and had none with SCHED_RR. Even in the
absence of the SCHED_ISO results, the other results dont make a lot of
sense.
Con
P.S. If you're running on SMP it may be worth booting on UP or using cpu
affinity (schedtool -a 0x1 will bind you to 1st cpu only) and see what
effect that is having. There are some interesting things that can
adversely affect latency on SMP.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature