Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:53:00 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly <areilly@bigpond.net.au> To: =?utf-8?B?6YKx5YmR?= <qj@huawei.com> Cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE problem: slow single processor, realtime prio vs network stack Message-ID: <20080828225300.GA51771@duncan.reilly.home> In-Reply-To: <20080828071804.GA54269@duncan.reilly.home> References: <20080827233831.GA16705@duncan.reilly.home> <000c01c908db$f78d9180$01000001@china.huawei.com> <20080828071804.GA54269@duncan.reilly.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 05:18:04PM +1000, Andrew Reilly wrote: > Hi Jian, > > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 03:01:59PM +0800, 邱剑 wrote: > > I found the network interrupt thread might take too long to run if > > net.isr.direct=1 > > > > I suspect your problem might be because the network kernel thread spend so > > long time that the sound interrupt could not find time slot to process. > > That sounds like what I think is happening, but I'm still > curious about why the same network stack manaages to be > interrupted by the audio driver when running the 4BSD scheduler, > but not the ULE sheduler. > > > You might just try to turn netisr off when running ULE > > > > sysctl -w net.isr.direct=0 > > I'll give that a try, as soon as possible. As promised to Jian, here's my report on how or whether that helped: no. If anything, it seemed to make the network-induced breakup of the audio timing a little worse, but I did no measurements to verify that impression. Thanks for the suggestion, though. Cheers, Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080828225300.GA51771>