[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091121231514.3012e679@infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:15:14 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Robert Swan <swan.r.l@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bisected] pty performance problem
On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:39:26 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > ! Neither has any I/O apart from the pty conversation, so I'd
> > expect to ! see CPU usage at 100%. When I ran it, the CPU was
> > pretty well idle. ! After a fair bit of fiddling, it turned out
> > that both sides were ! taking about 8ms for their read() calls. At
> > that point it seemed ! pretty clear that this was a delay in the
> > kernel, not the code. !
> > [snip]
> >
> > I can provide reasonably stripped down code which demonstrates the
> > problem. It has been reproduced by one other person, though his
> > delay was about 2ms.
let me guess; you have HZ=250 and the other person has HZ=1000...
since this seems consistent with doing a 1 jiffy delay...
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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