Re: [Fwd: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.4]

From: Florian Schmidt (mista.tapas_at_gmx.net)
Date: 10/31/04

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [Fwd: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.4]" 
    Date:	Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:28:06 +0100
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

    On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:22:37 +0100
    Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

    > cool! May i have a feature request :-) It would be quite useful to have
    > an option to see the jitter output in percentage and in microseconds as
    > well. I.e. an option to have such a format:
    >
    > late wakeup: +151.3 usecs (14.6%) jitter.

    yep, will do so ater trying the 0.6.1 kernel.

    > cycles are too large to be human readable, and absolute values are
    > harder to read when HZ is not 1024. So to get a 'quick feel' of the
    > delays in a system the above line would be the most informative (for me
    > that is). Also, the percentage can go back to %.1f i think, instead of
    > %.5f or so - it's good to have a decimal point in the percentage but one
    > number after it is more than enough.) The more compact the output, the
    > fewer useless info, the quicker the human brain can read it. (Obviously
    > to generate a nice graph out of it needs a different format.)

    well, to generate graphs out of the data one can choose to write the raw
    cycle counts into a "history file". Then one can process this raw data to
    hearts content. i will update the output routines to truncate the percentage
    to %.1f [or the c++ equivalent :)]

    >
    > > Here's a typical run (still on V0.5.16, will try V0.6 now):
    >
    > please try -V0.6.1, -V0.6 had a pretty stupid bug that could trigger
    > frequently.
    >
    > > threshold violations: 20
    > > max jitter: 58.1228%
    >
    > here it would also be useful to have the 'max jitter' in usecs. I.e. in
    > the above case it was somewhere around ~570 usecs.

    ack.

    flo
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [Fwd: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.4]"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Graphing 20 months of data into 2 lines
      ... for Apr06 to Mar 07 and so on. ... What is wrong with manipulating your raw data into something ... I want to have a line graph which shows Jan to Dec and compares two ... I want to use my current data without manipulating the data into 1 ...
      (microsoft.public.excel.charting)
    • Re: 2.6.11-rc2-mm1
      ... > o Annotate code with the lock that could be taken. ... > o Create a graph from the locking hierarchy obtained above. ... the graph surely has cycles. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: -mm seems significanty slower than mainline on kernbench
      ... Bollocks to scientific practice;-) It works, it produces very stable results, has done for a few years now. ... The visuals in the graph speak for it. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: -mm seems significanty slower than mainline on kernbench
      ... Martin J. Bligh wrote: ... ;-) They're deviation of 5 runs. ... The visuals in the graph speak for it. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Strange memory leak in 2.6.x
      ... We installed the patch from Alex on a test-system ... > last night and will switch it to the production machine this evening. ... Here the graph for the last week: ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)