Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:16a7:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gp39csp1273415pxb; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 04:49:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwKsJXJQugvMqKLu6G+JhTPTD935Kxy1RGpZBYlfxzRZT0CMzLMai+ckeJIgVv9usMbxazL X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1456:: with SMTP id d22mr26459328edx.77.1604494179018; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 04:49:39 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1604494179; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=bRNSDw+kErQM9EKbJ0tcLjbGf4H1ton4dogrz1CTlE9zzKITNYQYMwVEpybjXDBq3G EcwUR5/Wq8neQypSkgHCokKjFspJ1GmnF6Sx4LzKMtBktQvKBH1gMG1JvpR1d+CPzSdx FRF5k87xDcbf92FQg8wvZSfs7OBxOYtshM9FF5LWM4ls6jI/Y6kOtmqhO8yUAdvsuseJ ryJJ5/Ot4FyCIxsqGvHqgLQiVvp4MKUTfsPayimIvaMfecifJ6p31IC91zXDp7i6tAvN s6XhUYBWXofEUgsryQOkCF4Ln+LI3t+PQ1PZ039okr2puZhH30B2aV8uYkEn81owXucZ wpTw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=SNjt/XrRGbQR6+9zTR+JMtomtIbnIX0i3KMoW4+vkEQ=; b=FgbtN8DNDj/g8fGlMcrYlQAJpkPszU1vxB/n6dSNpxqDCWsVAWi/z8GMPq2QKiT1FW p5W4BV5Pgo0IxDjm1nJS5Nosln5sddga/Og9F4t0+SsAnRTmie+HkuDM+7tS5RLNQ393 xlSVv2o40/RjPYuCj4kIBJlX1JmAdXpo8zZXQscAaWaR/HJbYSHh5pM/pSigNuuk0vV5 2qqndq07aczU9uWYvD5Hxc3iz2w5tmJG5KWuq+ZiSnpko0Qo1/tnvmkJ3uSFnqbpGTlO Xa7PSlbTiLmzo9f7jrr79ChBzchXFov0xtcOBElMSp57twrM5GMQhfTbew5pT4F0Ccjs TlEQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=monom.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o10si204722ejg.80.2020.11.04.04.49.16; Wed, 04 Nov 2020 04:49:39 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=monom.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729591AbgKDMru (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:47:50 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org ([188.138.9.77]:35638 "EHLO mail.monom.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726527AbgKDMrt (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:47:49 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filter.mynetwork.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAF4500609; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:47 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mail.monom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from localhost (unknown [94.31.100.251]) by mail.monom.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA25B500596; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:47:46 +0100 From: Daniel Wagner To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , linux-rt-users , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] v5.10-rc2-rt4 Message-ID: <20201104124746.74jdsig3dffomv3k@beryllium.lan> References: <20201103195731.erjkgyzxzzjylhui@linutronix.de> <20201104103809.bhl2iorbwv6xowtw@beryllium.lan> <20201104104617.ueefmpdou4t3t2ce@linutronix.de> <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:19:48PM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote: > Yes, Just fired up signaltest 5 times for arm64 and x86_64 with the > latest release. Keep you posted. arm64 1184 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 386.00 1185 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 417.00 1186 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 350.00 1187 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 360.00 1188 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 339.00 I noticed that also the last view 5.9-rt releases have higher values. For example, version 5.9.0-rc8-rt12 has only 217us. x86_64 1189 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 50.00 1190 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 46.00 1191 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 45.00 1192 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : pass 47.00 1193 0_signaltest t0-max-latency : fail 52.00 Same thing for version 5.9.0-rc8-rt12, the max value was 40us. I'll work on getting these reports more useful, the performance trend seems to be an interesting metric.