* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So there seems to be a bug in the latency tracer where the timer is
> not being reset on reschedule. [...]
update: i found a bug in the latency tracer that could explain some of
the artifacts you noticed, IRQs would reset the tracing timer under
certa
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 17:12 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> Now the longest latency I see with "dbench 16"
> and PREEMPT_DESKTOP is 591us in the ext3 reservation code. Trace is
> attached (compressed) in case anyone is interested. But I do not
> consider anything under a millisecond to be a problem wi
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 09:22 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> hm, weird, and i have no solution for this yet. But i just found a
> related bug in the -RT patch in that it reverted a latency breaker in
> the ext3 path that your trace shows - affecting PREEMPT_DESKTOP. Could
> you try the 40-03 patch i jus
* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] Next I tried the same test but with JACK running. The longest
> latency reported was only 200 usecs, and I did not get xruns.
>
> Then, right after I stopped JACK, the latency tracer shot up to 1645
> usecs.
>
> So there seems to be a bug in the
On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 02:51 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 08:08 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > great! The change in question is most likely the copy_page_range() fix
> > that Hugh resurrected:
> >
> > ChangeSet 1.2037, 2005/03/08 09:26:46-08:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > [PA
On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 08:08 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> great! The change in question is most likely the copy_page_range() fix
> that Hugh resurrected:
>
> ChangeSet 1.2037, 2005/03/08 09:26:46-08:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> [PATCH] copy_pte_range latency fix
>
> Ingo's patch to
* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did the same quick latency tests with 2.6.12-rc1 that I posted about
> for 2.6.11 a few weeks ago.
>
> 2.6.12-rc1 is significantly better than 2.6.11. Running JACK at 64
> frames (1.3 ms) works very well. I was not able to prod
I did the same quick latency tests with 2.6.12-rc1 that I posted about
for 2.6.11 a few weeks ago.
2.6.12-rc1 is significantly better than 2.6.11. Running JACK at 64
frames (1.3 ms) works very well. I was not able to produce xruns even
with "dbench 64", which slows the system to a cr
8 matches
Mail list logo
