Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:16a7:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gp39csp576634pxb; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:41:01 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzXKM+VlywEhtYlWlRWvtgd6pbRb3AUQnmGNZHifHM+wjI7/DtpVdImOVvv6zfi6F16c3EO X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d711:: with SMTP id t17mr928274edq.83.1605120061520; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:41:01 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1605120061; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=EwZC76JMqF9G3k7M3k+pKu2z67jBpOD7qV4dvwuYxzb16/nlRq5GaI/1MOafaje0hI 1jPCmK0/ENDp1utJXWCAvF/lB1l76MJrQXW9DNABtbvKDHjf9viMnFaitnvvv7nqSdPU JqtaCIPu3ltDfDyfxb3abfB7G7QJeNOd20a1AhkDIBKZZVJ44w/27YAWOCTY0AQEu95/ YnjwaUGaYcgk9+Gr8lIji6T65e/JjgcvMEzLKdgMhoTSgJ+kHoTCpLdDlmWQ6fFMA6Dx 2w1Cxivl1mnO+j5C/zPIwraDqWZhjiERHyyHaT1HhCveUh0wSTzEDPEpQr4gIEtX+84o p8Zg== 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=EsMm7rTxZmttjXk5v5y4DBEoVGd0NH7oBlDdSuHw8hE=; b=D9ZziSwcj1X1uZVmFM+sMpVbImYlJf5p0nit1ceeJFIumpUIXRS/2G168X/0TKm+vj xfxpl9ssY25/JDRJR/rUIlIH/knjAKggXRKfvl86dDZBd0eNuI1f7zKz0q+WPN846J6s V3JKBIYqjwNcPayF8QkGQNPZJfq83gKoQmXMn8vPLT2lRensCC1wTDMFxwgXmi7OOKKq 6EnRwzx8yM+UxvnqfxWLdDLxFBzBlfhzBVPBj0JX1VTEMJ8/v+bfCsmYUdVexP3HiZrL tgGOtngVXtS3m1OKVIMfGZJyDGCQypr72qfF+C4qoqxMIt1yebNZIm/XWxds7umLoByj naLw== 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 u24si1835951eje.619.2020.11.11.10.40.36; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 10:41:01 -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 S1727232AbgKKSjH (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:07 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org ([188.138.9.77]:42210 "EHLO mail.monom.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726460AbgKKSjF (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:05 -0500 Received: from mail.monom.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filter.mynetwork.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id A727F500596; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 19:39:02 +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 3EFDF500108; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 19:39:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 19:39:01 +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: <20201111183901.GA23846@beryllium> References: <20201104104617.ueefmpdou4t3t2ce@linutronix.de> <20201104111948.vpykh3ptmysqhmve@beryllium.lan> <20201104124746.74jdsig3dffomv3k@beryllium.lan> <20201104130930.llx56gtqt532h7c7@linutronix.de> <20201104160650.b63zqof74wohgpa2@beryllium.lan> <20201106105447.2lasulgjrbqdhnlh@linutronix.de> <20201106161413.7c65uxenamy474uh@beryllium.lan> <20201109124718.ljf7inok4zakkjed@linutronix.de> <20201109143703.ps7gxhqrirhntilr@beryllium.lan> <20201109163143.tm5gjz77rr734lm5@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201109163143.tm5gjz77rr734lm5@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sorry for the late response, I had to reinstall my system after a FS corruption... On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:31:43PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > These test run only very short with hackbench as worlkload (5 minutes). > > Though I running these tests now for more than year with v4.4-rt and > > some times the newer -rt releases and I've never seen the latency > > numbers above 200us unless something was broken. Given that 5 minutes is > > not really long, I'll let those test run for longer to see if I get the > > same results when they run for one hour. - 5.9.0-rc8-rt12, ca 5h T: 0 (11626) P:80 C:15092432 Min: 17 Act: 34 Avg: 43 Max: 226 - 5.9.0-rc8-rt13, ca 1.5h T: 0 (24661) P:80 C:5581936 Min: 21 Act: 35 Avg: 45 Max: 250 - 5.9.0-rc8-rt14, ca 1h T: 0 ( 942) P:80 C:6522320 Min: 20 Act: 27 Avg: 44 Max: 352 This matches with the 5 minutes runs. -rt13 was still okay and -rt14 is clearly worse. > > 5.10.0-rc2-rt4 vs 5.10.0-rc2-rt4(lazy preemption disabled) > > > > 0_cyclicdeadline t2-max-latency pass/pass 274.00/ 61.00 349.18% > > So the value went from 274us to 61us after disabling lazy-preempt? Yes, that was all I changed. I want to redo this measurement. It really looks a bit bogus. Though, one thing after the other :) Daniel