Sdk11.1 cyclictest #352
Sdk11.1 cyclictest #352
Conversation
bryanbrattlof
requested review from
cshilwant,
StaticRocket,
praneethbajjuri,
uditkumarti,
aniket-l and
VeeruPrudhvi
as code owners
|
Since there are multiple platform variants for AM62x. |
| "Average (us)","5","6","6","5" | ||
| "Maximum (us)","68","31","34","28" | ||
| "Average (us)","6","6","6","6" | ||
| "Maximum (us)","45","30","39","64" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@praneethbajjuri AM62A coreSDK RC for 11.1 would still be +2 weeks from now.
Most likely nothing in vendor kernel should impact the RT Latency numbers but any chances of
stable update from branch linux-6.12.y of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux into ti-linux-6.12.y-cicd ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@cshilwant this numbers are ok for now. Will re-do AM62A and AM62L RT test closer to final week of release again and update the numbers if there is a delta.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, ACK from my end once #352 (comment) is fixed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bryanbrattlof @praneethbajjuri our target for 62A is to keep below 50us. 64us seems a regression ?
| "Average (us)","5","6","6","5" | ||
| "Maximum (us)","68","31","34","28" | ||
| "Average (us)","6","6","6","6" | ||
| "Maximum (us)","45","30","39","64" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bryanbrattlof @praneethbajjuri our target for 62A is to keep below 50us. 64us seems a regression ?
| "Average (usec)","6","6","5","6" | ||
| "Maximum (usec)","30","33","31","35" | ||
| "Average (usec)","6","6","6","6" | ||
| "Maximum (usec)","34","74","35","39" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
74us needs to be investiagated. This is more than x2 the original number
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah these numbers are all over the place for all platforms. I've opened a ticket internally to follow up on this
Update the real time Linux latency numbers for SDK 11.1 Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]>
Update the real-time Linux latency numbers for SDK 11.1 Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]>
Update the real-time Linux latency numbers for SDK 11.1 Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]>
Update the real-time Linux latency numbers for SDK 11.1 Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]>
Update the real-time Linux latency numbers for SDK 11.1 Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <[email protected]>
bryanbrattlof
force-pushed
the
sdk11.1-cyclictest
branch
from
0c611af to
f8839d9
Compare
|
Yeah I agree @praneethbajjuri . I've updated that sentence to be a little more specific. |
|
Could you address the vale comments? |
| @@ -57,14 +57,14 @@ Test commands used for running stress-ng and cyclictest together | |||
| stress-ng --cpu-method=all -c 4 & | |||
| cyclictest -m -Sp80 -D6h -h400 -i200 -M -q | |||
|
|
|||
| The latencies where observed with this SDK are summarized below: | |||
| The latencies observed with the default yocto SDK are summarized below: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rewording as
"The latencies observed with the default yocto SDK is in the following table:" could fix the vale comment. Check by updating if this fixes across the devices.
| "Average (usec)","6","6","5","6" | ||
| "Maximum (usec)","30","33","31","35" | ||
| "Average (usec)","6","6","6","6" | ||
| "Maximum (usec)","34","74","35","39" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this usec vale warning can be ignored.
|
moved it to draft based on #352 (review) |
No description provided.