Gabriele Monaco <[email protected]> writes: > This looks good, but if I understand it correctly, the same violation should > be > spotted by both monitors from two different perspectives, but sleep catches > more > things (e.g. tasks using wrong sleeping ways despite their wakeup): > > # perf stat -a -e rv:error_sleep -e rv:error_wakeup -- stress-ng --cpu 5 > --cpu-load 90 --sched rr -t 5 > > Performance counter stats for 'system wide': > > 285 rv:error_sleep > > 20 rv:error_wakeup > > > Provided I don't really know what's happening down there (I just let the > stressor run free), this discrepancy is expected, right?
Thanks for testing it. Beside monitoring low-prio task waking high-prio task, the rtapp/sleep monitor also checks that user uses the correct APIs for sleeping. So yes, this discrepancy is expected. Nam
