Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932087AbWBWUUG (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:20:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932103AbWBWUUG (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:20:06 -0500 Received: from kanga.kvack.org ([66.96.29.28]:34952 "EHLO kanga.kvack.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932087AbWBWUUE (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:20:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:15:10 -0500 From: Benjamin LaHaise To: Gautam H Thaker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: ~5x greater CPU load for a networked application when using 2.6.15-rt15-smp vs. 2.6.12-1.1390_FC4 Message-ID: <20060223201510.GA30329@kvack.org> References: <43FE134C.6070600@atl.lmco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43FE134C.6070600@atl.lmco.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 846 Lines: 18 On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 02:55:56PM -0500, Gautam H Thaker wrote: > It has been documented before (and accepted) that this patch turns Linux into > a RT kernel but considerably slows down the code paths, esp. thru the I/O > subsystem. I want to provide some additional measurements and seek opinions > of if it might ever be possible to improve on this situation. 32 bit kernel or 64 bit kernel? What about profiling the system with oprofile? -ben -- "Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sorry to interrupt, but the police are here and they've asked us to stop the party." Don't Email: . - 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/