From: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
To: Pierangelo Masarati <masarati@domain.hid>
Cc: adeos-main@gna.org
Subject: Re: [Adeos-main] latency fix for 2.6.25?
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 13:14:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48579C9B.1070402@domain.hid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <485799E6.2060602@domain.hid>
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>> Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
>>>> Dear ADEOS users,
>>>>
>>>> 2.6.25 seems to show abnormal latencies on hardware that showed good
>>>> performances up to 2.6.24. We think we traced down the issue to x86's
>>>> process_xx.c, which disappeared after regressing default_idle() to
>>>> 2.6.24. The related changes are described in the attached patch.
>>>>
>>> This patch would badly break the runqueue statistics, and likely the Linux
>>> scheduler tick engine too.
>>>
>>> Actually, the hunk in default_idle() seems useless, since co-kernel activity
>>> should be accounted as Linux idle time anyway. Does this patch also fixes
>>> the issue you tracked down?
>> Dear Philippe,
>>
>> we'll try it. It will require some time to empirically let it run for a
>> while to be sure. Usually, the weird latency effect occurs within half
>> a hour, but we'd like to wait a little longer.
>>
>> Apart from not disturbing Linux, your fix should work, since it doesn't
>> touch the hw flag. The problem with the patch is likely that: CPU i
>> gets the seqlock after hlt,
>
Ok, you were talking about the _previous_ implementation, right? Ok, I must be a
bit slow today; Yes, the issue was very likely the one you described.
> I don't see any seqlock in the idling code. Did you mean the spinlock in
> sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event()?
>
> and can be preempted by the RTOS; CPU k
>> tries to acquire the lock before hlt, i.e. with hw flags disabled,
>
> Hw flags are still on actually -- local_irq_disable() won't switch them off.
>
> so it
>> cannot be preempted by the RTOS. If the RTOS after preempting CPU i
>> does a bit of work, the RTOS on CPU k is stalled until the RTOS finishes
>> working on CPU i.
>
>> In any case, it is now running on two machines: a 32 and a 64 bit. I'll
>> let you know.
>>
>> Sincerely, p.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Adeos-main mailing list
>> Adeos-main@domain.hid
>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/adeos-main
>>
>
>
--
Philippe.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-17 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-16 16:02 [Adeos-main] latency fix for 2.6.25? Pierangelo Masarati
2008-06-16 16:32 ` Philippe Gerum
2008-06-17 10:41 ` Pierangelo Masarati
2008-06-17 11:03 ` Philippe Gerum
2008-06-17 11:09 ` Philippe Gerum
2008-06-17 11:14 ` Philippe Gerum [this message]
2008-06-17 12:54 ` Pierangelo Masarati
2008-06-17 13:04 ` Philippe Gerum
2008-06-18 10:36 ` Pierangelo Masarati
2008-06-18 17:13 ` Philippe Gerum
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=48579C9B.1070402@domain.hid \
--to=rpm@xenomai.org \
--cc=adeos-main@gna.org \
--cc=masarati@domain.hid \
/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.