From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Bug #12650] Strange load average and ksoftirqd behavior with 2.6.29-rc2-git1 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:09:23 +0100 Message-ID: <20090216200923.GA28938@elte.hu> References: <20090215180355.GA2273@localhost.localdomain> <20090215193102.GA16873@elte.hu> <20090216084223.GA2641@localhost.localdomain> <20090216095059.GL6182@elte.hu> <87hc2u61e9.fsf@free.fr> <20090216122632.GA3158@elte.hu> <87ljs6pmao.fsf@free.fr> <20090216132151.GA17996@elte.hu> <20090216160613.GA6785@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090216185616.GB6785@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090216185616.GB6785-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Damien Wyart , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Here the calls to rcu_process_callbacks() are only 75 > microseconds apart, so that this function is consuming more > than 10% of a CPU. The strange thing is that I don't see a > raise_softirq() in between, though perhaps it gets inlined or > something that makes it invisible to ftrace. look at the latest trace please, that has even the most inline raise-softirq method instrumented, so all the raising is visible. Ingo