Re: PREEMPT_RT vs ADEOS: the numbers, part 1

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > could you send me the .config you used for the PREEMPT_RT tests? Also, 
> > you used -47-08, which was well prior the current round of performance 
> > improvements, so you might want to re-run with something like -48-06 or 
> > better.
> 
> Much to our dislike, we only noticed that we forgot to disable the 
> debug options after posting the results :/ So, in all fairness, we 
> will be redoing the tests on PREEMPT_RT early next week. [...]

yeah, i suspected something like that - the PREEMPT_RT latency numbers 
were so out of whack with anything i've measured on similar boxes. The 
debugging features on PREEMPT_RT are powerful but have a high overhead.

could you send me your PREEMPT_RT .config? (whichever version you have 
handy) That's the easiest way i can tell you which options to watch out 
for.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/