[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200705211544.58018.kernel@prachanda.hub>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 15:44:54 +0530
From: Anant Nitya <kernel@...chanda.info>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: bad networking related lag in v2.6.22-rc2
On Monday 21 May 2007 13:42:01 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > > ouch! a nearly 1 second delay got observed by the scheduler - something
> > > is really killing your system!
> >
> > ah, you got the latency tracer from Thomas, as part of the -hrt patchset
> > - that makes it quite a bit easier to debug. [...]
>
> and ... you already did a trace for Thomas, for the softirq problem:
>
> http://cybertek.info/taitai/trace.txt.bz2
>
> this trace shows really bad networking related kernel activities!
>
> gkrellm-5977 does this at timestamp 0:
>
> gkrellm-5977 0..s. 0us : cond_resched_softirq (established_get_next)
>
> 2 milliseconds later it's still in established_get_next() (!):
>
> gkrellm-5977 0..s. 2001us : cond_resched_softirq (established_get_next)
>
> and the whole thing takes ... 455 msecs:
>
> gkrellm-5977 0..s. 455443us+: cond_resched_softirq (established_get_next)
>
> i think this suggests that you have tons of open sockets. What does
> "netstat -ts" say on your box?
On 2.6.21.1 doing normal work while seeding few torrents produces this
with "netstat -ts". I will send you same information for 2.6.22-rc2 after a
reboot.
Regards
Ananitya
>
> Ingo
--
Out of many thousands, one may endeavor for perfection, and of
those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth.
-- Gita Sutra Of Mysticism
View attachment "netstat-ts-normal-workload.txt" of type "text/plain" (1363 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists