[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080930111217.GA21367@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:12:17 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: unpredictability in scheduler test results -- still present
* Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com> wrote:
>
>>> It turns out that disabling CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE makes the load
>>> balancing problem go away and causes all cpus to be used.
>>>
>>> With this option enabled, the problem seems to be present as far back
>>> as 2.6.27-rc2. (2.6.27-rc1 doesn't compile on my machine, and 2.6.26
>>> doesn't have ftrace).
>>>
>>> I have no idea why turning on dynamic ftrace would affect load
>>> balancing behaviour, but it's very repeatable. The very first test
>>> run after booting works fine, and all successive runs fail to balance
>>> properly.
>
>> OTOH, what does 'truning on dftrace' exactly mean? Just enabling it in
>> the .config, or also activating it via /debug/tracing/current_tracer?
>
> Just enabling it in the .config is enough to trigger the behaviour
> change. I'm not explicitly activating any traces.
ok, that would be a clear ftrace bug i guess?
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