[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091124152245.GB21821@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:22:45 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, efault@....de,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:tracing/core] ring-buffer benchmark: Run producer/consumer
threads at nice +19
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 15:39 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > > This module is not made to be run all the time. I know you do it
> > > for testing. But running it at lowest priority kills the reason
> > > this module was made in the first place!
> >
> > Well, it also found quite a few bugs in the ring-buffer code, beyond
> > benchmarking so i'd like to use it even without looking at the
> > numbers.
>
> OK, then lets make a module option (and command line) that will allow
> the setting of the priority of the threads. Either nice or even fifo
> (use at your own risk ;-)
Yeah, that's fine to me - as long as the default is unintrusive. (i.e.
like the rcutorture threads, which run at nice +19 too - and kmemcheck
which runs at +19 as well.)
We still have the perl overhead in function-tracing kernel builds btw
:-/
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