Re: PREEMPT_RT vs I-PIPE: the numbers, part 2

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com> wrote:

> Hmm... well, I can't say I'm uninterested. Any chances we can get a 
> copy of the scripts you use to do the MOAILT (Mother Of All Irq 
> Latency Tests).

my 'dohell' script is embarrasingly simple:

 while true; do dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=1024000 count=1024; done &
 while true; do killall hackbench; sleep 5; done &
 while true; do ./hackbench 20; done &
 ( cd ltp-full-20040707; su mingo -c ./run40; ) &
 ping -l 100000 -q -s 10 -f v &
 du / &
 ./dortc &

and i also start a preloaded flood-ping externally. ./dortc does:

 chrt -f 98 -p `pidof 'IRQ 8'`
 cd rtc_wakeup
 ./rtc_wakeup -f 8192 -t 100000

and ./run40 does:

 while true; do ./runalltests.sh -x 40; done

it's not rocket science - i'm just starting a sensible mix of latency 
generators, without letting any of them dominate the landscape.

> > [ I know the results i am seeing, but i wont 
> > post them as a counter-point because i'm obviously biased :-) I'll let 
> > people without an axe to grind do the measurements. ]
> 
> That's an extra reason for giving us a copy (or pointing us to one) of 
> the script you use to run your tests :)

see above. (It's no secret, i described components of this workload in 
one of my first mails to the adeos thread. Btw., what happened to adeos 
irq latency testing?)

	Ingo