A short note, it seems we get pagefaults in rt context, latency-test says so.

 I will build latest and run some tests. The intriguing thing is all
other rt programs run fine, just linuxcnc that overshoots.

 / regards, Lars Segerlund.


2013/6/13 Alec Ari <[email protected]>:
> Hello everyone! I just talked to Lars Segerlund over the course of a few 
> private emails, we've narrowed down the "Missed scheduling deadline" problem 
> for LinuxCNC with PREEMPT_RT to an issue within RTAPI. A lot of people (if 
> not everyone) has this problem. I have used debian kernels, I have compiled 
> nearly 100 different kernels, changing settings in regards to ACPI, the RCU, 
> every option that has a direct impact on latency, whether positive or 
> negative, has been changing, with absolutely no change in latency.
>
> Several kernel versions have been tried, such as the official debian 
> PREEMPT_RT kernel, and several custom kernels that I configured completely 
> from scratch (all options by default disabled, allowing me to turn on only 
> the ones I need to boot my system) and no change what-so-ever in regards to 
> pagefaults and latency.
>
> This is no time to say "don't use gentoo" "don't compile your own kernel" 
> "your kernel config is broken" etc, this is an issue that relies within the 
> LinuxCNC tree. I have been hacking away at RTAI and PREEMPT_RT for a few 
> years now to know how they both work, inside and out. I am not however, 
> experienced with LinuxCNC itself, but I can guarantee that this issue is not 
> relevant to Linux distributions, kernel releases, kernel configs, tool chain 
> issues, and so on and so fourth.
>
> After running cyclictest for hours tonight (12 threads) while in the 
> background compiling kernels, GMP, GCC, GNU Mpc, all with 50 parallel 
> compiling jobs, on top of all that, running a CPU burn-in utility doing 
> excessive number crunching with the use of exactly 1,000 threads, with 
> integers in the billions. Latency with cyclictest reached no higher than 110 
> microseconds, and that's with using the standard POSIX interval timer, and 
> not even a fully tweaked kernel.
>
> The latency-test program in LinuxCNC almost instantly shoots up to over 
> 200,000 nanoseconds upon interacting with the system at all (idling it can 
> last a bit longer.) Launching LinuxCNC itself throws several errors as well, 
> "unexpected real-time delay, check dmesg for details" (which for the record 
> doesn't mention anything..) and basically says the same thing in the terminal 
> window, just worded a bit differently.
>
> Lars Segerlund and I are going to be tackling this issue the best we can, but 
> any changes to do with LinuxCNC are going to have to be by people besides 
> myself. Changes that have to do with the kernel side of things, that part I 
> can do. Any additional help is greatly appreciated!
>
> Alec Ari
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to