From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9D8C2D0A3 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:47:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C24206A4 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729655AbgKDMru (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:47:50 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org ([188.138.9.77]:35638 "EHLO mail.monom.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726527AbgKDMrt (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:47:49 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filter.mynetwork.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAF4500609; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (unknown [94.31.100.251]) by mail.monom.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA25B500596; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:46 +0100 From: Daniel Wagner To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , linux-rt-users , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4 Message-ID: <20201104124746.74jdsig3dffomv3k@beryllium.lan> References: <20201103195731.erjkgyzxzzjylhui@linutronix.de> <20201104103809.bhl2iorbwv6xowtw@beryllium.lan> <20201104104617.ueefmpdou4t3t2ce@linutronix.de> <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:19:48PM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote: > Yes, Just fired up signaltest 5 times for arm64 and x86_64 with the > latest release. Keep you posted. arm64 1184 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 386.00 1185 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 417.00 1186 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 350.00 1187 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 360.00 1188 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 339.00 I noticed that also the last view 5.9-rt releases have higher values. For example, version 5.9.0-rc8-rt12 has only 217us. x86_64 1189 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 50.00 1190 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 46.00 1191 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 45.00 1192 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 47.00 1193 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 52.00 Same thing for version 5.9.0-rc8-rt12, the max value was 40us. I'll work on getting these reports more useful, the performance trend seems to be an interesting metric.