[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080421194359.GD8770@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:43:59 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Richard Jonsson <richie@...erworld.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [git pull] scheduler changes for v2.6.26
* Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl> wrote:
> > It would be nice if you could try sched-devel/latest because it has
> > an improved ftrace "sched_switch" tracer where you can generate much
> > longer traces of this incident. Try the new /debug/trace_entries
> > runtime tunable.
>
> I'll try to get the trace and will reply on the private thread we had.
> I may need additional instructions though.
you could also reply to this thread if you dont mind, so that others can
chime in too.
the 700-800 msecs of delays you see are very "brutal" so there must be
something fundamentally wrong going on here.
Could you first check (under sched-devel/latest) the quality of your
sched-clock, via running this script:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/watch-rq-clock.sh
if you run it, it should output ~1000 msecs periods every second:
europe:~> watch-rq-clock.sh
1002.115042
1005.509851
1004.187275
1004.409980
1004.430264
1004.445508
if it's way too 'slow', say it only 100 msecs per second, then the
scheduler clock is mis-measuring time and what the scheduler thinks to
be a 40 msecs delay might become a 400 msecs delay.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists