From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Ranjit Manomohan <ranjitm@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Buggy comparison in check_preempt_tick
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 06:48:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1293515293.6930.11.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1293348184.6942.72.camel@marge.simson.net>
On Sun, 2010-12-26 at 08:23 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> But anyway..
>
> echo NO_WAKEUP_PREEMPT > sched_features
> echo NO_TESTME > sched_features
> two hogs running on isolcpu 3, pid 6890 at nice -2
>
> while sleep 1; do grep 'pert.*6890' /proc/sched_debug; done
>
> runnable tasks:
> task PID tree-key switches prio
> -------------------------------------------------------
> R pert 6890 50201.071851 7453 118
> R pert 6890 50596.171290 7513 118 +60
> R pert 6890 50991.265264 7572 118 +59
> R pert 6890 51383.781965 7631 118 +59
> pert 6890 51781.463129 7691 118 +60
>
> echo TESTME > sched_features
> pert 6890 126881.306733 18977 118
> R pert 6890 127273.825719 19036 118 +59
> R pert 6890 127668.928218 19095 118 +59
> R pert 6890 128064.031372 19154 118 +59
> R pert 6890 128459.134339 19213 118 +59
>
> ...with a compute load, the thing should be a noop, and appears to be so
> (with busted compare fixed anyway;). You have to be well overloaded for
> buddies to kick in these days, so it's probably pretty hard to get
> enough spread for the thing to fire.
I did a bit more testing yesterday with wakeup loads. There's enough
spread for the test to nudge things a few [0..4] times per second/core.
I'd either fix the comparison, and let it keep on nudging once in a
while, or whack the whole thing.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-28 5:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-25 0:26 [PATCH] sched: Buggy comparison in check_preempt_tick Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-25 7:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-26 0:05 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-26 7:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-12-28 5:48 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2011-01-05 4:41 ` [PATCH] " Mike Galbraith
2011-01-18 19:06 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix signed unsigned comparison in check_preempt_tick() tip-bot for Mike Galbraith
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=1293515293.6930.11.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ranjitm@google.com \
--cc=venki@google.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