Hi Luis, I re-added CC to the mailing list.
Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:53:56AM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > | Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > ... > I deleted lots of lines just to make it easy to see my question: > ... > | OK, here is the full report. > ... > | bash-3.00# ./cyclictest -n -p80 -t1 -i1000 > | 2.91 4.81 13.72 1/50 23887 > | > | T: 0 ( 976) P:80 I:1000 C:1634520 Min: 15 Act: 45 Avg: 68 Max: 138 > > ... > > | bash-3.00# ./cyclictest -n -p80 -i1000 > | 52.31 96.08 61.61 2/51 9129 > | > | T: 0 ( 976) P:80 I:1000 C: 795180 Min: 14 Act: 75 Avg: 69 Max: 134 > > Are the loadavg values right? If so, the results were obtained in very > different circunstances. In the first case, load was around 2.91... in the > second one, 52.31. This is also true for the other tests below. > > Please compare /proc/loadavg and /proc/loadavgrt (a simple cat do the > trick). If loadavgrt is reporting bogus values, let us know. It was fixed a > looong time ago, but I never tested that in a ppc. Here is the output: bash-3.00# cat /proc/loadavg; cat /proc/loadavgrt 3.12 3.13 4.57 3/46 5541 75.35 73.84 72.94 0/46 5543 There is no constant load as I run: "while ./hackbench 10; do ./calibrator 400 32M cali; sleep 30; done" in the second terminal window. What you see is the load when I interrupted the test manually. Wolfgang. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ RTnet-users mailing list RTnet-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users
