linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Patel, Vedang" <vedang.patel@intel.com>
To: "julia@ni.com" <julia@ni.com>,
	"bigeasy@linutronix.de" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: "ranshalit@gmail.com" <ranshalit@gmail.com>,
	"linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Hart, Darren" <darren.hart@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Regression on rt kernel while using POSIX timers
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 02:34:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1487212458.10966.7.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170216020516.GB1733@jcartwri.amer.corp.natinst.com>

On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 20:05 -0600, Julia Cartwright wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 05:54:47PM +0100, bigeasy@linutronix.de
> wrote:
> > 
> > On 2017-02-13 18:48:33 [+0000], Patel, Vedang wrote:
> > > 
> > > I am getting very similar results even if I change the priority
> > > of
> > > ktimersoftd to 99. Are there any recent rt patches which might
> > > have
> > > changed the behaviour of POSIX timers? 
> > I had this running
> > 
> > > 
> > > ~# cyclictest -t1 -p 80 -i 500 -l 100000
> > > # /dev/cpu_dma_latency set to 0us
> > > policy: fifo: loadavg: 627.48 661.98 543.65 406/2254
> > > 18149          
> > > 
> > > T: 0 (16148) P:80 I:500 C: 100000 Min:      5 Act:   11 Avg:   11
> > > Max: 23
> > on a AMD-A10 box and the latest v4.9-RT. This does not look that
> > bad.
> > From tracing it doesn't look too good either. The -m option should
> > be
> > your friend. Since the cyclictest isn't pinned to a CPU and I have
> > four
> > of them, the scheduler decides to migrate cyclictest on each wake
> > up.
> > yay. cyclictest itself gets woken up via a signal from the
> > ktimersoftirq.
> Perhaps a separate off-shoot topic, but has there been significant
> changes in v4.9 upstream (or v4.9-rt) which impact how often
> migration
> is performed?  We've seen what appears to be much more aggressive
> migration of SCHED_FAIR tasks, (aggressive in the sense that more
> threads are migrated more often), which appears to cause contention
> on
> rq-locks impacting latencies in the wake_up paths.
> 
> We're still working to further characterize at this
> point....hopefully
> more information forthcoming.
I tried conducting similar experiments on v4.4.47-rt59. But, the
results are same as v4.9 kernel.

My machine also has 8 cores and migration might cause regressions. Let
me try pinning the processes to a single CPU and see if that is making
any difference. 

More information to follow soon...

Thanks for all the inputs, 
Vedang Patel
Software Engineer
Intel Corporation
>    Julia

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-16  2:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-08 18:41 Regression on rt kernel while using POSIX timers Patel, Vedang
2017-02-10 19:07 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-02-13 18:48   ` Patel, Vedang
2017-02-15 16:54     ` bigeasy
2017-02-16  2:05       ` Julia Cartwright
2017-02-16  2:34         ` Patel, Vedang [this message]
2017-02-22  1:43           ` Patel, Vedang
2017-03-01 15:22             ` bigeasy
2017-03-01 19:03               ` Tracy Smith
2017-03-02  3:23                 ` Patel, Vedang
2017-03-03 19:41                   ` Julia Cartwright
2017-03-03 20:32                     ` Julia Cartwright
2017-03-03 21:09                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-03 23:36                       ` Patel, Vedang
2017-03-06 11:29                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-07  2:01                           ` Patel, Vedang
2017-03-07 17:03                             ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-20 22:54                               ` Patel, Vedang
2017-03-03 16:51                 ` Thomas Gleixner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-13 20:32 Ran Shalit

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=1487212458.10966.7.camel@intel.com \
    --to=vedang.patel@intel.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=darren.hart@intel.com \
    --cc=julia@ni.com \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ranshalit@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).