On Monday 15 May 2006 04:15, Sébastien Dugué wrote:
> I've been running you test program on my box under a stress-kernel
> load and did not observe any failure as you describe, not even a max
> latency overshooting the 100 us limit (max latencies in the 60~70 us).
>
> I even went to decrease PERIOD to 1 ms and still no failure.
>
> I'm running rt20 with the futex priority based wakeup patch on
> a dual 2.8 GHz HT Xeon box. All hardirq and softirq threads are at their
> default priority.
Interesting, I'll have to try this on some more hardware and see if I can
reproduce there.
>
> How do you generate the network load you mention? Maybe I could try at
> least with the same load you're using.
I was simply copying a 60MB file to the test machine via scp, in a bash while
loop. I haven't been doing this on my most recent runs however, and they
still fail. So I don't believe the net load is directly related.
I am going to work with Ingo's trace-it.c today and report back.
--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Realtime Linux Team
-
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]
