From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Subject: Re: Latency data - 2.6.14-rc3-rt13
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 02:46:59 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510110241250.30989@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5bdc1c8b0510102045u7e4bc9eeld5b690b5e96c4a5f@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On 10/10/05, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ( softirq-timer/0-3 |#0): new 3997 us maximum-latency critical section.
>
> So the root cause of this 4mS delay is the 250Hz timer. If I change
> the system to use the 1Khz timer then the time in this section drops,
> as expected, to 1mS.
>
> ( softirq-timer/0-3 |#0): new 998 us maximum-latency critical section.
> => started at timestamp 121040020: <acpi_processor_idle+0x20/0x379>
> => ended at timestamp 121041019: <thread_return+0xb5/0x11a>
>
> So, thinking very interesting here I think.
>
> Back to the drawing board as to my xruns.
>
Are your xruns showing the same type of latency? If you switch to the
1000Hz do you get only 1mS latency on your xruns too? This sounds like
the application might have gone to sleep and didn't wake up until
something scheduled it in. Or something else with the scheduler. I doubt
that this has to due with preemption or interrupts being off, but
something that uses jiffies to calculate.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-11 6:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-10 20:16 Mark Knecht
2005-10-10 20:49 ` Daniel Walker
2005-10-10 21:12 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-10 21:28 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-10 21:44 ` Daniel Walker
2005-10-10 22:09 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-10 22:28 ` Daniel Walker
2005-10-10 23:33 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-10 23:49 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-11 3:45 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-11 6:46 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2005-10-11 8:56 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2005-10-11 11:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-11 22:45 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-12 0:02 ` Lee Revell
2005-10-12 1:09 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-12 1:21 ` Lee Revell
2005-10-12 1:25 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-12 6:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-10-12 16:18 ` Lee Revell
2005-10-12 17:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-10-11 3:56 ` Matan Peled
2005-10-11 4:45 ` Mark Knecht
2005-10-11 6:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-11 7:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-10 21:39 ` Daniel Walker
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=Pine.LNX.4.58.0510110241250.30989@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markknecht@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®