From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.14-rt22 (and mainline) excessive latency
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:36:41 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051221133641.GA7613@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1135135970.28229.0.camel@mindpipe>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 10:32:48PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 17:47 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 05:24:42AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I captured this 3+ ms latency trace when killing a process with a few
> > > > thousand threads. Can a cond_resched be added to this code path?
> > >
> > > > bash-17992 0.n.1 29us : eligible_child (do_wait)
> > > >
> > > > [ 3000+ of these deleted ]
> > > >
> > > > bash-17992 0.n.1 3296us : eligible_child (do_wait)
> > >
> > > Atomicity of signal delivery is pretty much a must, so i'm not sure this
> > > particular latency can be fixed, short of running PREEMPT_RT. Paul E.
> > > McKenney is doing some excellent stuff by RCU-ifying the task lookup and
> > > signal code, but i'm not sure whether it could cover do_wait().
> >
> > Took a quick break from repeatedly shooting myself in the foot with
> > RCU read-side priority boosting (still have a few toes left) to take
> > a quick look at this. The TASK_TRACED and TASK_STOPPED cases seem
> > non-trivial, and I am concerned about races with exit.
> >
> > Any thoughts on whether the latency is due to contention on the
> > tasklist lock vs. the "goto repeat" in do_wait()?
>
> It's a UP system so I'd be surprised if there were any contention.
Couldn't there be contention due to preemption of someone holding
the tasklist lock?
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-21 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-20 0:40 2.6.14-rt22 (and mainline) excessive latency Lee Revell
2005-12-20 4:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-21 1:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-21 3:32 ` Lee Revell
2005-12-21 13:36 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2005-12-21 19:54 ` Lee Revell
2005-12-23 4:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-12-23 4:22 ` Lee Revell
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=20051221133641.GA7613@us.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.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