[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6651d87b-d827-ad2e-a38c-278eb0427bdb@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:00:33 -0400
From: Francis Giraldeau <francis.giraldeau@...il.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
Gilad Ben Yossef <giladb@...lanox.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ping: [PATCH v15 00/13] support "task_isolation" mode
On 2016-09-12 08:05 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2016 11:15:45 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Monday, September 12, 2016 06:14:44 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:01:58PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>>>> On 9/7/2016 5:11 PM, Francis Giraldeau wrote:
>>>>> When running only the test_jitter(), the isolation mode is lost:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ 6741.566048] isolation/9515: task_isolation mode lost due to irq_work
>>>>>
>>>>> With ftrace (events/workqueue/workqueue_execute_start), I get a bit more info:
>>>>>
>>>>> kworker/1:1-676 [001] .... 6610.097128: workqueue_execute_start: work struct ffff8801a784ca20: function dbs_work_handler
>>>>>
>>>>> The governor was ondemand, so I tried to set the frequency scaling
>>>>> governor to performance, but that does not solve the issue.
>>>
>>> Rafael, I'm thinking the performance governor should be able to run
>>> without sending IPIs. Is there anything we can quickly do about that?
>>
>> The performance governor doesn't do any IPIs.
>>
>> At this point I'm not sure what's going on.
>
> I've just tried and switching over to the performance governor makes
> dbs_work_handler go away for me (w/ -rc4 with some extra irrelevant patches
> on top) as it should.
Ho gosh, the command "cpufreq-set -g performance" sets the governor only
for cpu0. I was expecting it to set for all cpus. The isolation test runs
on cpu1 and this cpu was still with ondemand governor. With performance
governor, the dbs_work_handler does not occurs anymore and the isolated
task is not preempted by that kworker thread anymore.
Sorry for the noise and thanks for checking!
Francis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists