[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTin+eO_jPceSOHL4e7vqd+tf0ZCMHJ-USoz8aZL1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 10:11:33 -0800
From: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] 2.6.37-rc3 massive interactivity regression on ARM
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 09:43 -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
>>
>> The same problem will be there with below code, with irq_delta >
>> delta, clock_task can go backwards which is not good.
>> + delta -= irq_delta;
>> + rq->clock_task += delta;
>>
>> The reason for this is rq->clock and irqtime updates kind of happen
>> independently and specifically, if a rq->clock update happens while we
>> are in a softirq, we may have this case of going backwards on the next
>> update.
>
> But how can irq_delta > delta?, we measure it using the same clock.
>
This would be mostly a corner case like:
- softirq start time t1
- rq->clock updated at t2 and rq->clock_task updated at t2 without
accounting for current softirq
- softirq end time t3
- cpu spends most time here in softirq or hardirq
- next rq->clock update at t4 and rq->clock_task update, with delta =
t4-t2 and irq_delta ~= t4 - t1
--
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