On 2/23/06, Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Gautam H Thaker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > ::::::::::::::
> > top: 2.6.15-rt15-smp.out # REAL_TIME KERNEL
> > ::::::::::::::
>
> > 2906 root -66 0 18624 2244 1480 S 41.4 0.1 27:11.21 nalive.p
> > 6 root -91 0 0 0 0 S 32.3 0.0 21:04.53 softirq-net-rx/
> > 1379 root -40 -5 0 0 0 S 14.5 0.0 9:54.76 IRQ 23
>
> One effect of the -rt kernel is that it shows IRQ load explicitly -
> while the stock kernel can 'hide' it because there interrupts run
> 'atomically', making it hard to measure the true system overhead. The
> -rt kernel will likely show more overhead, but i'd not expect this
> amount of overhead.
>
> To figure out the true overhead of both kernels, could you try the
> attached loop_print_thread.c code, and run it on: an idle non-rt kernel,
> and idle -rt kernel, a busy non-rt kernel and a busy -rt kernel, and
> send me the typical/average loops/sec value you are getting?
>
> Furthermore, there have been some tasklet related fixes in 2.6.15-rt17,
> which maybe could improve this workload. Maybe ...
Would it make more sense to compare 2.6.15 and 2.6.15-rt17, as opposed
to 2.6.12-1.1390_FC4 and 2.6.15-rt17? Seems like the closer the two
kernels are, the easier it will be to isolate the differences.
Thanks,
Nish
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
