From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: [bug report] sched: stop_machine() usage causes load balancer to misbehave
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:57:25 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48E55FE5.40108@nortel.com> (raw)
I mentioned before that ftrace (specifically the ftraced daemon) seems
to be interfering with the load balancer. After some experimenting, it
appears that any regular calls to stop_machine() will end up confusing
the load balancer.
As an experiment, I disabled ftraced (which would normally result in
correct load balancing) but added a single kernel thread which simply
runs the following loop, where "chrisd2" is a dummy function.
while(1) {
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
schedule_timeout(HZ);
stop_machine(chrisd2, NULL, NULL);
}
With the modified kernel, my testcase shows that the load balancer
doesn't balance--all tasks remain on one cpu while the other one stays idle.
Most of the users of stop_machine() (kprobes on s390, cpu hotplug,
module load/unload, numa_zonelist_order, etc.) don't seem to be called
on a regular basis. Only ftrace behaves this way, which is why it
appeared to be the source of the problem.
I haven't tracked down the specific reasons for the misbehaviour, but it
seems undesirable.
Anyone have any ideas what might be causing this? Is it a problem with
the load balancer, or an unavoidable consequence of what stop_machine()
is doing?
Thanks,
Chris
next reply other threads:[~2008-10-02 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-02 23:57 Chris Friesen [this message]
2008-10-03 0:02 ` [bug report] sched: stop_machine() usage causes load balancer to misbehave Steven Rostedt
2008-10-04 5:27 ` Chris Friesen
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=48E55FE5.40108@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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.