On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 06:16:28PM -0400, George Nychis wrote: > Eric, > > >Before even thinking about libpmt, it would be wise to figure out the > >much greater CPU consumption in libc. Start with the big offenders. > > > >When that's sorted out (and we're confident about your profile > >numbers) we can have a discussion about what's next. > > Sounds good. > > > > >BTW, what is the test case that you're running? > >What is the exact sequence of commands that you are issuing to > >generate this trace? I'd like to try to reproduce this on my machines. > > So actually I was using reset, but said dump.
Good ;) > Heres my exact sequence: > > sudo opcontrol --start > sudo opcontrol --reset > ./test_usrp_inband_underrun (interp/decim @ 16, 30e6 samples) > sudo opcontrol --save=inband_tx_rx_5 > cd .libs/ I think you want a dump here, to ensure that everything is forced to disk. > opreport -rl session:inband_tx_rx_5 lt-test_usrp_inband_underrun &> \ > inband_tx_rx_5 > > If i run another test, I omit the start :P > > And, heres the results of doing just that: > http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/inband_tx_rx_5 > > Heres the rbf I'm using, you can change it by editing the underrun > application, the current checked in copy of my branch is using > nanocell9, just switch it. > http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/cs1.rbf > > A new run with test_usrp_inband_tx: > http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/inband_tx_6 > > The key difference between the two is underrun has both TX and RX > running, TX only has TX running... and also underrun generates one large > message of size d_nsamples_to_send, where the normal TX program breaks > d_nsamples_to_send down into multiple frames. Thanks! Eric _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
