From: "Tim Sander" <tim.sander@hbm.com>
To: "linux-rt-users" <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Remy Bohmer" <linux@bohmer.net>
Subject: CONFIG_PEEMPT_RT_FULL vs. CONFIG_PREEMPT_RTB
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 16:04:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201108151604.54251.tim.sander@hbm.com> (raw)
Hi
I have more than twice as much cpu load when running the
CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL=y kernel compared to CONFIG_PREEMPT_RTB=y. First i
thought that might be the difference that one config had softirqs enabled and
the other not. Now i realized that softirqs are already enabled with
CONFIG_PREEMPT_RTB so i don't see a good reason why the CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
option should have two times more cpu load than CONFIG_PREEMPT_RTB.
The arm1136 cpu (533Mhz pcm043) has 9.6khz interrupt rate so i surely expect
some load. But i wouldn't expect so much difference between
CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL and CONFIG_PREEMPT_RTB. So does anybody has an idea
what might a reason to so much more cpu load when going to full preemption?
Besides of the cpu load i also found out that with rt11 i can again wake up
usermode from a IRQF_NO_THREAD waiting on a waitqueue. So the steps outlined
in this mail http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg06834.html do not
seem to be neccessary anymore? Or does this create an error and than some high
load?
Best regards
Tim
Hottinger Baldwin Messtechnik GmbH, Im Tiefen See 45, 64293 Darmstadt, Germany | www.hbm.com
Registered as GmbH (German limited liability corporation) in the commercial register at the local court of Darmstadt, HRB 1147
Company domiciled in Darmstadt | CEO: Andreas Huellhorst | Chairman of the board: James Charles Webster
Als Gesellschaft mit beschraenkter Haftung eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Darmstadt unter HRB 1147
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Darmstadt | Geschaeftsfuehrung: Andreas Huellhorst | Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: James Charles Webster
The information in this email is confidential. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please let me know and delete this email.
Die in dieser E-Mail enthaltene Information ist vertraulich und lediglich fur den Empfaenger bestimmt. Sollten Sie nicht der eigentliche Empfaenger sein, informieren Sie mich bitte kurz und loeschen diese E-Mail.
next reply other threads:[~2011-08-15 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-15 14:04 Tim Sander [this message]
2011-08-15 20:44 ` Remy Bohmer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201108151604.54251.tim.sander@hbm.com \
--to=tim.sander@hbm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@bohmer.net \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome