From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: unfair scheduling with tbb application observed, could it be a kernel issue?
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 16:25:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1344263139.6853.10.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAC_CU1hzuSAeHG7-5g5kOa=MMh3KnJZNwWr+ySkJQyxixck4WA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 16:04 +0200, Pedro Larroy wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think we are observing unfair scheduling of processes that use intel
> TBB thread scheduler, as we have several processes with nice of 19 and
> ioniced idle, and somehow the process with nice 0 should be getting
> more than 1000% cpu
..
> Tasks: 559 total, 37 running, 522 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu(s): 67.8%us, 16.0%sy, 13.0%ni, 1.7%id, 0.6%wa, 0.0%hi, 1.0%si, 0.0%st
> Mem: 98998032k total, 97444688k used, 1553344k free, 53772k buffers
> Swap: 4198316k total, 704860k used, 3493456k free, 73270776k cached
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 14373 disco 39 19 8734m 6.9g 12m R 107 7.3 36:09.72 mmcc
> 15293 disco 39 19 3174m 1.4g 12m R 101 1.5 19:33.79 mmcc
> 20341 disco 39 19 2735m 1.1g 12m R 101 1.1 8:40.38 mmcc
> 18241 disco 39 19 3040m 1.3g 11m R 100 1.4 14:27.91 mmcc
> 15204 disco 39 19 5418m 3.7g 12m R 99 3.9 20:53.89 mmcc
> 24901 larroy 20 0 327m 296m 4276 R 88 0.3 0:04.14 cc1plus
> 24942 larroy 20 0 193m 159m 4008 R 87 0.2 0:01.47 cc1plus
> 24862 larroy 20 0 417m 388m 7992 R 84 0.4 0:07.02 cc1plus
> 24959 larroy 20 0 184m 153m 4008 R 80 0.2 0:01.32 cc1plus
> 24935 larroy 20 0 254m 222m 4024 R 77 0.2 0:02.44 cc1plus
> 24919 larroy 20 0 336m 301m 4036 R 76 0.3 0:03.61 cc1plus
> 24972 larroy 20 0 43160 15m 2332 R 76 0.0 0:00.95 cc1plus
> 24918 larroy 20 0 287m 255m 4024 R 70 0.3 0:02.99 cc1plus
> 24962 larroy 20 0 44872 17m 2332 R 69 0.0 0:01.23 cc1plus
> 24976 larroy 20 0 41212 14m 2332 R 66 0.0 0:00.67 cc1plus
> 24501 larroy 20 0 687m 657m 8044 R 64 0.7 0:22.97 cc1plus
> 24933 larroy 20 0 211m 177m 4008 R 62 0.2 0:01.79 cc1plus
> 24899 larroy 20 0 327m 296m 4276 R 57 0.3 0:04.25 cc1plus
Are tasks running in per user cgroups or such? If so, you'd need to
adjust group shares.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-06 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-06 14:04 unfair scheduling with tbb application observed, could it be a kernel issue? Pedro Larroy
2012-08-06 14:25 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2012-08-06 14:28 ` Pedro Larroy
2012-08-06 14:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-08-06 14:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-08-06 15:14 ` 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=1344263139.6853.10.camel@marge.simpson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pedro.larroy.lists@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