linux-kernel - Re: interrupt overhead on ARM architecture

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:08:10 -0700
From:	Alessio Sangalli <alesan@...oweb.com>
To:	Iwo Mergler <iwo@...l-direct.com.au>
CC:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: interrupt overhead on ARM architecture

Iwo Mergler wrote:

> In other words, you can't even measure the latency on a particular
> system and then assume it will stay anywhere near constant. Comparing
> different systems with the same processor core is hopeless.

Everything makes perfect sense. For this reason, I am willing to do some
tests on my own platform. How would you suggest to proceed? I would need
an extremely accurate way to measure time to begin with and then:

- read that time reference
- generate an interrupt by placing some data in a device or so
- reading again that time reference as first thing in the ISR
- save the result

- do the above in various scenarios, with different drivers enabled, CPU
load, etc etc

bye
Alessio

--
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/