* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed profiling the kernel with PREEMPT_DESKTOP that mcount and
> __mcount add quite a bit of overhead. Something like .5% CPU each.
> Sorry, I didn't save the oprofile output.
>
> So, disable CONFIG_MCOUNT if you want minimal overhead from the RT
>
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 14:30 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Philippe Elie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > oprofile_ops.cpu_type == NULL, this has been fixed 3 weeks ago, can
> > you retry with -rc4 ?
>
> i've uploaded an -rc4 port of the -RT tree half an hour ago (-39-00).
>
Thanks, -rc4 did fix
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 07:55:35PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 14:30 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Philippe Elie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > oprofile_ops.cpu_type == NULL, this has been fixed 3 weeks ago, can
> > > you retry with -rc4 ?
> >
> > i've uploaded
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 14:30 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Philippe Elie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > oprofile_ops.cpu_type == NULL, this has been fixed 3 weeks ago, can
> > you retry with -rc4 ?
>
> i've uploaded an -rc4 port of the -RT tree half an hour ago (-39-00).
>
OK, I will test that
* Philippe Elie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> oprofile_ops.cpu_type == NULL, this has been fixed 3 weeks ago, can
> you retry with -rc4 ?
i've uploaded an -rc4 port of the -RT tree half an hour ago (-39-00).
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" i
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 14:16 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > PS. Ingo: Any plans to move the RT tree to -mm again (would save me
> > time patching; does keep me practised though)?
>
> not at the moment - but you might want to make your port available t
* Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PS. Ingo: Any plans to move the RT tree to -mm again (would save me
> time patching; does keep me practised though)?
not at the moment - but you might want to make your port available to
others?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 01:07 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> Are there any known incompatibilities with oprofile and the RT preempt patch?
non so far for me, I use that combo quite a lot at work. However I do
use the -mm series which might contain oprofile updates not found in
plain -rc.
Kind regards,
* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are there any known incompatibilities with oprofile and the RT preempt
> patch?
not that i know of. Does the same thing work fine with !PREEMPT_RT? (or
the patch unapplied?)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 at 01:07 +, Lee Revell wrote:
> Are there any known incompatibilities with oprofile and the RT preempt patch?
>
> Lee
>
> Oops: [#1]
> PREEMPT
> alloc
> CPU:0
> EIP:0060:[oprofilefs_str_to_user+21/64]Not tainted VLI
> EFLAGS: 00010246 (2.6.11-rc2-RT-V
Are there any known incompatibilities with oprofile and the RT preempt patch?
Lee
Oops: [#1]
PREEMPT
Modules linked in: realtime commoncap af_packet via_rhine mii crc32 ehci_hcd
usbhid uhci_hcd usbcore via_
agp agpgart evdev snd_rtctimer snd_emu10k1_synth snd_emu10k1 snd_ac97_codec
snd_pc
11 matches
Mail list logo
