From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:01:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:01:01 -0400 Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net ([207.69.200.57]:44579 "EHLO mclean.mail.mindspring.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:00:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool From: Robert Love To: Tobias Diedrich Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010920220121.A18683@router.ranmachan.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <1000939458.3853.17.camel@phantasy> <20010920220121.A18683@router.ranmachan.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Evolution-Format: text/plain X-Mailer: Evolution/0.13.99+cvs.2001.09.19.21.54 (Preview Release) Date: 20 Sep 2001 18:01:15 -0400 Message-Id: <1001023279.6048.224.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 16:01, Tobias Diedrich wrote: > Should the patch work with SMP systems ? > Here is what I get: I never thought that it shouldn't, but upon thinking about it maybe it won't :) You are the second person reporting those all-the-same latency values. I think the SMP locks are being reported wrongly by the patch. I will take a look at it. Thanks -- Robert M. Love rml at ufl.edu rml at tech9.net