From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263085AbUGMDJo (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2004 23:09:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263107AbUGMDJo (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2004 23:09:44 -0400 Received: from muss.CIS.McMaster.CA ([130.113.64.9]:2719 "EHLO cgpsrv1.cis.mcmaster.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263085AbUGMDJm (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2004 23:09:42 -0400 From: Gabriel Devenyi To: ck@vds.kolivas.org Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Preempt Threshold Measurements Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 23:09:43 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200407121943.25196.devenyga@mcmaster.ca> <200407122248.50377.devenyga@mcmaster.ca> <20040713025502.GR21066@holomorphy.com> In-Reply-To: <20040713025502.GR21066@holomorphy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200407122309.43088.devenyga@mcmaster.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ah good, thanks for the suggestion on how to improve this... Now, what exactly is that, and where/how do I change it.... (I really should start/finish that "understanding the linux kernel" book of mine) -- Gabriel Devenyi devenyga@mcmaster.ca On Monday 12 July 2004 22:55, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 10:48:50PM -0400, Gabriel Devenyi wrote: > > Well I'm not particularly educated in kernel internals yet, here's some > > reports from the system when its running. > > 6ms non-preemptible critical section violated 4 ms preempt threshold > > starting at do_munmap+0xd2/0x140 and ending at do_munmap+0xeb/0x140 > > [] do_munmap+0xeb/0x140 > > [] dec_preempt_count+0x110/0x120 > > [] do_munmap+0xeb/0x140 > > [] sys_munmap+0x3f/0x60 > > [] sysenter_past_esp+0x52/0x71 > > Looks like ZAP_BLOCK_SIZE may be too large for you. Lowering that some > may "help" this. It's probably harmless, but try lowering that to half > of whatever it is now, or maybe 64*PAGE_SIZE. It may be worthwhile > to restructure how the preemption points are done in unmap_vmas() so > we don't end up in some kind of tuning nightmare. > > > -- wli > _______________________________________________ > ck@vds.kolivas.org > ck mailing list - unmoderated. Please reply-to-all when posting. > http://bhhdoa.org.au/mailman/listinfo/ck