No. Actually, after some retests my observation is that it happens regardless the thread is pinned or not. So,
When thread *T* is pinned to CPU #10 and the task interval is set to 1ms, the average task execution time is *100 µs*. However, when the task interval is increased to 40ms on the same pinned core, the average execution time significantly degrades to *250 µs*. If T is not pinned, the result is same. piątek, 13 lutego 2026 o 18:39:03 UTC+1 Mark E. Dawson, Jr. napisał(a): > Do you have a baseline for how your isolated core should perform using a > tool like 'osnoise'? > > On Friday, February 13, 2026 at 10:18:49 AM UTC-6 [email protected] wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> let's look at the example: >> >> The system is running with the following kernel parameters: >> >> isolcpus=10, nohz_full=10, nohz=on, idle=poll, intel_pstate=disable. >> >> We have a thread *T* that uses Thread.onSpinWait() while polling a >> lock-free shared queue. In this context, the *task interval* refers to >> the time elapsed between adding consecutive tasks to the queue. >> >> When thread *T* is pinned to CPU #10 and the task interval is set to >> 1ms, the average task execution time is *100 µs*. However, when the task >> interval is increased to 40ms on the same pinned core, the average >> execution time significantly degrades to *250 µs*. >> >> In contrast, when thread *T* is unpinned, the performance remains much >> more consistent. At a 1ms task interval, the average execution time is *110 >> µs*, and it only slightly increases to *120 µs* when the interval is >> extended to 40ms. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mechanical-sympathy/13de5790-c2c1-4559-bb8c-20ab39c39222n%40googlegroups.com.
