public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Thomas Charbonnel <thomas@undata.org>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
	Free Ekanayaka <free@agnula.org>,
	Eric St-Laurent <ericstl34@sympatico.ca>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"K.R. Foley" <kr@cybsft.com>,
	Felipe Alfaro Solana <lkml@felipe-alfaro.com>,
	Daniel Schmitt <pnambic@unu.nu>,
	Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com,
	"P.O. Gaillard" <pierre-olivier.gaillard@fr.thalesgroup.com>,
	nando@ccrma.stanford.edu, luke@audioslack.com, free78@tin.it
Subject: Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R1
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 13:49:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040903114949.GA29493@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1094211218.5453.3.camel@localhost>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2395 bytes --]


* Thomas Charbonnel <thomas@undata.org> wrote:

> I still get > 170 us latency from rtl8139 :
> http://www.undata.org/~thomas/R1_rtl8139.trace

this is a single-packet latency, we wont get much lower than this with
the current techniques. Disabling ip_conntrack and tracing ought to
lower the real latency somewhat.

> And again this one :
> preemption latency trace v1.0.5 on 2.6.9-rc1-VP-R1
> --------------------------------------------------
>  latency: 597 us, entries: 12 (12)
>     -----------------
>     | task: swapper/0, uid:0 nice:0 policy:0 rt_prio:0
>     -----------------
>  => started at: smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x32/0xd0
>  => ended at:   smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x86/0xd0
> =======>
> 00010000 0.000ms (+0.000ms): smp_apic_timer_interrupt (apic_timer_interrupt)
> 00010000 0.000ms (+0.000ms): profile_tick (smp_apic_timer_interrupt)
> 00010000 0.000ms (+0.000ms): profile_hook (profile_tick)
> 00010001 0.000ms (+0.595ms): notifier_call_chain (profile_hook)
> 00010000 0.595ms (+0.000ms): do_nmi (mcount)
> 00020000 0.596ms (+0.000ms): profile_tick (nmi_watchdog_tick)
> 00020000 0.596ms (+0.000ms): profile_hook (profile_tick)
> 00020001 0.597ms (+0.000ms): notifier_call_chain (profile_hook)
> 00020000 0.597ms (+689953.444ms): profile_hit (nmi_watchdog_tick)
> 00010001 689954.042ms (+1.141ms): update_process_times (do_timer)
> 00000001 0.597ms (+0.000ms): sub_preempt_count (smp_apic_timer_interrupt)
> 00000001 0.598ms (+0.000ms): update_max_trace (check_preempt_timing)

this is a pretty weird one. First it shows an apparently non-monotonic
RDTSC: the jump forward and backward in time around profile_hit. I
suspect the real RDTSC value was lower than the previous one and caused
an underflow. What is your cpu_khz in /proc/cpuinfo?

the other weird one is the +0.595 usec entry at notifier_call_chain(). 
That code is just a couple of instructions, so no real for any overhead 
there.

could you try the attached robust-get-cycles.patch ontop of your current
tree and see whether it impacts these weirdnesses? The patch makes sure
that the cycle counter is sane: two subsequent readings of it were
monotonic and less than 1000 cycles apart.

this patch probably wont remove the +0.595 msec latency though - the
RDTSC value jumped forward there permanently. Maybe the RDTSC value is
somehow corrupted by NMIs - could you turn off the NMI watchdog to
check?

	Ingo

[-- Attachment #2: robust-get-cycles.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1594 bytes --]

--- linux/kernel/latency.c.orig2	
+++ linux/kernel/latency.c	
@@ -66,6 +66,18 @@ static unsigned long notrace cycles_to_u
 	return (unsigned long) delta;
 }
 
+static cycles_t notrace robust_get_cycles(void)
+{
+	cycles_t t0 = get_cycles(), t1;
+
+	for (;;) {
+		t1 = get_cycles();
+		if (t1 - t0 < 1000)
+			return t1;
+		t0 = t1;
+	}
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_LATENCY_TRACE
 
 unsigned int trace_enabled = 1;
@@ -89,7 +101,7 @@ ____trace(struct cpu_trace *tr, unsigned
 		entry = tr->trace + tr->trace_idx;
 		entry->eip = eip;
 		entry->parent_eip = parent_eip;
-		entry->timestamp = get_cycles();
+		entry->timestamp = robust_get_cycles();
 		entry->preempt_count = preempt_count();
 	}
 	tr->trace_idx++;
@@ -295,7 +307,7 @@ check_preempt_timing(struct cpu_trace *t
 		return;
 #endif
 	atomic_inc(&tr->disabled);
-	latency = cycles_to_usecs(get_cycles() - tr->preempt_timestamp);
+	latency = cycles_to_usecs(robust_get_cycles() - tr->preempt_timestamp);
 
 	if (preempt_thresh) {
 		if (latency < preempt_thresh)
@@ -337,7 +349,7 @@ check_preempt_timing(struct cpu_trace *t
 out:
 #ifdef CONFIG_LATENCY_TRACE
 	tr->trace_idx = 0;
-	tr->preempt_timestamp = get_cycles();
+	tr->preempt_timestamp = robust_get_cycles();
 #endif
 	tr->critical_start = parent_eip;
 	__trace(eip, parent_eip);
@@ -376,7 +388,7 @@ void notrace add_preempt_count(int val)
 		struct cpu_trace *tr = &__get_cpu_var(trace);
 
 		local_irq_save(flags);
-		tr->preempt_timestamp = get_cycles();
+		tr->preempt_timestamp = robust_get_cycles();
 		tr->critical_start = eip;
 #ifdef CONFIG_LATENCY_TRACE
 		tr->trace_idx = 0;

  reply	other threads:[~2004-09-03 11:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-30 19:13 [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-08-30 19:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-01 12:31   ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 - netdev_max_back_log is too small P.O. Gaillard
2004-09-01 13:05     ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 11:24       ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q6 - network is no longer smooth P.O. Gaillard
2004-09-02 11:28         ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 15:26           ` P.O. Gaillard
2004-08-31  8:49 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02  6:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02  6:55   ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q8 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02  7:04     ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02  7:15       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02  7:31         ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02  7:46           ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  1:10             ` Rusty Russell
2004-09-02 23:25         ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 23:28           ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 23:32             ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02  7:17       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02  8:23     ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 11:10     ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q9 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 12:14       ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 13:16       ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 13:23         ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 14:38           ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 21:57       ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 22:06         ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 22:14           ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 22:15             ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  0:24             ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  3:17               ` Eric St-Laurent
2004-09-03  6:26                 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  6:36                   ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  6:49                     ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  7:01                       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  7:05                       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  7:40                         ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  7:50                           ` Free Ekanayaka
2004-09-03  8:05                             ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  9:05                               ` Free Ekanayaka
2004-09-03  9:25                               ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R1 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  9:50                                 ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 10:29                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 10:43                                     ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 11:33                                 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 11:49                                   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2004-09-03 12:05                                     ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 16:14                                     ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 17:36                                       ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 11:36                                 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R2 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03  8:09                           ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03  8:13                             ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03  8:21                               ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 12:52                               ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 18:09                         ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 11:04         ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 17:02         ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 20:40           ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 17:10         ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 18:17           ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:36             ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 19:30             ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R3 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 19:49               ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04  3:39               ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04  3:43               ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04  6:41                 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-04 12:28                   ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04  8:57                 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-04 10:16                   ` Lee Revell
2004-09-04 14:35                   ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 20:05                     ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:39           ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:41             ` K.R. Foley
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-09-07 16:54 [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R1 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-08 18:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-10  2:31   ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-10 17:56     ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-10 19:26       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-10 19:28         ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-09 16:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-08 20:33 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-08 22:31 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-09 16:44   ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-09  6:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-09 15:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-09 15:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-09 18:31 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-09 19:23 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-09 19:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-09 19:02   ` Alan Cox
2004-09-09 22:41 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-09 22:56 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-10 12:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-10 12:57 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-10 13:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-10 14:28 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-10 19:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-13 14:44 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-09-14 18:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-15 15:26   ` Stephen Smalley

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=20040903114949.GA29493@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com \
    --cc=ericstl34@sympatico.ca \
    --cc=free78@tin.it \
    --cc=free@agnula.org \
    --cc=kr@cybsft.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkml@felipe-alfaro.com \
    --cc=luke@audioslack.com \
    --cc=nando@ccrma.stanford.edu \
    --cc=pierre-olivier.gaillard@fr.thalesgroup.com \
    --cc=pnambic@unu.nu \
    --cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
    --cc=thomas@undata.org \
    /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