All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Micah Dowty <micah@vmware.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>,
	Cyrus Massoumi <cyrusm@gmx.net>,
	LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>
Subject: Re: High priority tasks break SMP balancer?
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:44:08 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071116024408.GA20322@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711151830260.31691@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>

On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 06:31:49PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Micah Dowty wrote:
> 
> > On all kernels I've tested from after your patch was committed, I can
> > reproduce a problem where a single high-priority thread which wakes up
> > very frequently can artificially inflate the SMP balancer's load
> > average for one CPU, causing other tasks to be migrated off that
> > CPU. The result is that this high-priority thread (which may only use
> > a few percent CPU) gets an entire CPU to itself. Even if there are
> > several busy-looping threads running, this CPU will be mostly idle.
> 
> I am a bit at a loss as to how this could relate to the patch. This looks 
> like a load balance logic issue that causes the load calculation to go 
> wrong?

My best guess is that this has something to do with the timing with
which we sample the CPU's instantaneous load when calculating the load
averages.. but I still understand only the basics of the scheduler and
SMP balancer. All I really know for sure at this point regarding your
patch is that git-bisect found it for me.

It almost seems like the load average algorithm is ignoring the CPU's
idle time, and only accounting for the time that CPU spends running
processes. One of the symptoms is that the mostly-idle CPU in my test
has an instantaneous load which is usually zero, but a very high load
average. (9000, 30000, etc.)

I want to help get to the bottom of this issue, but I was hoping that
someone experienced with the Linux scheduler and SMP balancer would
have some insight or some suggestions about what to try next.

Thanks,
--Micah

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-16  2:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-09 22:34 High priority tasks break SMP balancer? Micah Dowty
2007-11-09 23:56 ` Cyrus Massoumi
2007-11-10  0:11   ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-14 18:39     ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-15 18:48     ` Kyle Moffett
2007-11-15 19:14       ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-15 20:07         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-15 20:24           ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-15 21:28             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-15 21:35               ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-16  2:31                 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-16  2:44                   ` Micah Dowty [this message]
2007-11-16  6:07                     ` Ingo Molnar
2007-11-16  9:19                       ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-16 10:45                         ` Ingo Molnar
2007-11-16 10:48                       ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-16 22:12                         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-16 10:48                       ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-16 22:14                         ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-16 23:26                           ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-17  1:03                             ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-17 19:10                               ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-19 18:51                                 ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-19 22:22                                   ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-19 23:05                                     ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-20  5:57                                       ` Ingo Molnar
2007-11-20 18:06                                         ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-20 21:47                                           ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-22  7:46                                             ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-22 12:53                                               ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-26 19:44                                                 ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-27  9:21                                                   ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-11-27 17:13                                                     ` Micah Dowty
2007-11-16 19:13         ` David Newall
2007-11-16 21:38           ` Micah Dowty

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071116024408.GA20322@vmware.com \
    --to=micah@vmware.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=cyrusm@gmx.net \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.