[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070402063018.GA10209@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 08:30:18 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Nivedita Singhvi <niv@...ibm.com>
Cc: Dave Sperry <dave_sperry@...e.org>, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Poor UDP performance using 2.6.21-rc5-rt5
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> one thing to check would be whether both kernels use the same
> clocksource, via:
>
> cat /sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/current_clocksource
>
> but at first sight there's no clocksource related overhead in the
> oprofile.
i've started a similar netperf test and clocksource overhead dominates
the profile:
5553 handle_fasteoi_irq 26.1934
5940 nv_start_xmit_optimized 6.6892
6014 ack_ioapic_quirk_irq 44.5481
7591 mask_IO_APIC_irq 154.9184
8155 __copy_from_user_ll 37.4083
13371 io_apic_base 417.8438
13565 get_next_timer_interrupt 29.7478
13966 __modify_IO_APIC_irq 151.8043
14213 do_irqd 22.7045
17834 unmask_IO_APIC_irq 424.6190
20503 __schedule 6.4455
48456 cpu_idle 180.8060
170001 acpi_pm_read 8947.4211
517107 total 0.1566
acpi_pm_read() amounts to 32% overhead!
i'm not sure why the oprofile results show no clocksource overhead - the
-rt kernel typically uses the pm-timer on Opterons.
to get more comparable results, boot the vanilla kernel with the
"apicpmtimer" boot option, and/or do this after bootup:
echo acpi_pm > /sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/current_clocksource
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists