Eric,
Before even thinking about libpmt, it would be wise to figure out the
much greater CPU consumption in libc. Start with the big offenders.
When that's sorted out (and we're confident about your profile
numbers) we can have a discussion about what's next.
Sounds good.
BTW, what is the test case that you're running?
What is the exact sequence of commands that you are issuing to
generate this trace? I'd like to try to reproduce this on my machines.
So actually I was using reset, but said dump.
Heres my exact sequence:
sudo opcontrol --start
sudo opcontrol --reset
./test_usrp_inband_underrun (interp/decim @ 16, 30e6 samples)
sudo opcontrol --save=inband_tx_rx_5
cd .libs/
opreport -rl session:inband_tx_rx_5 lt-test_usrp_inband_underrun &> \
inband_tx_rx_5
If i run another test, I omit the start :P
And, heres the results of doing just that:
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/inband_tx_rx_5
Heres the rbf I'm using, you can change it by editing the underrun
application, the current checked in copy of my branch is using
nanocell9, just switch it.
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/cs1.rbf
A new run with test_usrp_inband_tx:
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/inband_tx_6
The key difference between the two is underrun has both TX and RX
running, TX only has TX running... and also underrun generates one large
message of size d_nsamples_to_send, where the normal TX program breaks
d_nsamples_to_send down into multiple frames.
- George
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio