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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 ED0B3C2D0A3 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 764BB20936 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="FnOxIEPD"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="1k8za+g3" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728329AbgKLNyu (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 08:54:50 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53728 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728072AbgKLNyu (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 08:54:50 -0500 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF365C0613D1; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 05:54:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:54:46 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1605189288; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=l8J/g3+UlJiPv1r44/uRYuW0HBR3RLzuLwjDlVtLk+U=; b=FnOxIEPDMOCmSPlj5bs8TfynVc/bbg3oPSLt8Wcu0/8q6yKMDB0Me58btrNhQ2UYtUMv6d a/b44lUS98qsqWxrKzpKRFuyog1bMO3l8eHpdTemD8ZLGnukKnXKypvNasCkccodLyffBR BW9ttWbWwKST18K5KignkZwoy0J7UsjDI8v4okq72qe5e08pgfdSfxHamcFn4PBNWiU6Eb LcGKh5PrkOqRwYdF2smV5Sy61i7tX0gCZBaBWq6zIIUrWhyMoCG5KtpoIESaRIJqXN4JhU P19OiIGnXzhaSYnv7KhQgB1JtQLyeSCzL8bg4/Y2j1Ii+JHX5nJPLkvNNrLqQQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1605189288; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=l8J/g3+UlJiPv1r44/uRYuW0HBR3RLzuLwjDlVtLk+U=; b=1k8za+g3OUbKN+AqR0TIwRZ0iXUFK6/n+GrrZhMyr+IyPON27fI5Gofy9TkwR1hMquGo+Y 8lfDHWQ2tC0ORnAg== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Daniel Wagner Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , linux-rt-users , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4 Message-ID: <20201112135446.ghwvgio6f66igcho@linutronix.de> References: <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> <20201104124746.74jdsig3dffomv3k@beryllium.lan> <20201104130930.llx56gtqt532h7c7@linutronix.de> <20201104160650.b63zqof74wohgpa2@beryllium.lan> <20201106105447.2lasulgjrbqdhnlh@linutronix.de> <20201106161413.7c65uxenamy474uh@beryllium.lan> <20201109124718.ljf7inok4zakkjed@linutronix.de> <20201109143703.ps7gxhqrirhntilr@beryllium.lan> <20201110180518.miuxa25j7lnn7f2q@linutronix.de> <20201112123902.netkfwzccwrtscdv@beryllium.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201112123902.netkfwzccwrtscdv@beryllium.lan> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-11-12 13:39:02 [+0100], Daniel Wagner wrote: > With the current version signaltest + your test patch and 'taskset -c1' > the results looks good again, around 230us (running since 2 hours). I've > tested first without taskset and it took about an half hour to hit > 350us. So pinning the threads on one CPU fixes it. okay. So case closed. > I think we change signaltest to use the correct affinity on > default. Also, I see that sigwaittest has some code for it, but it, but > it would be a good idea to set the defaults so that out of the box the > test does the right thing. Sounds reasonable. Having tasks jumping from one CPU to another may lead to higher latencies. > I'm sorry about dragging you into this problem. I feared that something in lazy preempt or signal stack is broken. But it appears not to be the case :) Sebastian