From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: spaminos-ker@yahoo.com, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:25:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1093739136.7078.1.camel@krustophenia.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41312174.40707@bigpond.net.au>
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 20:21, Peter Williams wrote:
> spaminos-ker@yahoo.com wrote:
> > --- Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > -----------------
> > => started at: kernel_fpu_begin+0x21/0x60
> > => ended at: _mmx_memcpy+0x131/0x180
> > =======>
> > 00000001 0.000ms (+0.000ms): kernel_fpu_begin (_mmx_memcpy)
> > 00000001 0.730ms (+0.730ms): sub_preempt_count (_mmx_memcpy)
> > 00000001 0.730ms (+0.000ms): _mmx_memcpy (check_preempt_timing)
> > 00000001 0.730ms (+0.000ms): kernel_fpu_begin (_mmx_memcpy)
> >
>
> As far as I can see sub_preempt_count() is part of the latency measuring
> component of the voluntary preempt patch so, like you, I'm not sure
> whether this report makes any sense.
Is this an SMP machine? There were problems with that version of the
voluntary preemption patches on SMP. The latest version, Q3, should fix
these.
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-29 0:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <411D50AE.5020005@bigpond.net.au>
2004-08-17 23:19 ` Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others) spaminos-ker
2004-08-18 0:12 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-24 21:11 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-24 23:04 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-24 23:22 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-26 2:30 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-26 2:42 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-26 8:39 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-28 1:59 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-29 0:21 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-29 0:25 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2004-08-29 0:45 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-29 2:03 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-29 2:28 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-29 4:53 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-29 1:19 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-29 1:22 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-29 1:31 ` Peter Williams
2004-09-13 20:09 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-29 2:20 ` Lee Revell
[not found] <20040811093945.GA10667@elte.hu>
2004-08-17 23:08 ` spaminos-ker
[not found] <20040811010116.GL11200@holomorphy.com>
2004-08-11 2:21 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-11 2:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-08-11 2:45 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11 2:47 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11 3:23 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11 3:31 ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-11 3:46 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11 3:44 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-13 0:13 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-13 1:44 ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11 3:09 ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-11 10:24 ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam
2004-08-12 2:04 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-12 2:24 ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-12 2:53 ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-07 21:53 spaminos-ker
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=1093739136.7078.1.camel@krustophenia.net \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=spaminos-ker@yahoo.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