[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140504184016.GA16438@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 20:40:16 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC/HACK] x86: Fast return to kernel
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> > That said, regular *device* interrupts do often return to kernel
> > mode (the idle loop in particular), so if you have any way to
> > measure that, that might be interesting, and might show some of
> > the same advantages.
>
> I can try something awful involving measuring latency of
> hardware-timed packets on a SolarFlare card, but I'll have
> calibration issues. I suppose I could see if 'ping' gets faster.
> In general, this will speed up interrupts that wake userspace from
> idle by about 100ns on my box, since it's presumably the same size
> and the speedup per loop in my silly benchmark.
To simulate high rate device IRQ you can generate very high frequency
lapic IRQs by using hrtimers, that's generating a ton of per CPU lapic
IRQs.
Thanks,
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