From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752270Ab2AYXok (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:44:40 -0500 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:52647 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751329Ab2AYXoj (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:44:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:44:24 -0800 From: Mandeep Singh Baines To: "David H. Durgee" Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Request for assistance - excessive kworker CPU wakeups Message-ID: <20120125234424.GL4656@google.com> References: <4EE27D28.4040909@verizon.net> <4F205056.2020002@verizon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4F205056.2020002@verizon.net> X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.38.8-gg683 (x86_64) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David H. Durgee (dhdurgee@verizon.net) wrote: > Mandeep Singh Baines wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 1:27 PM, David H. Durgee wrote: > >>I recently purchased a Lenovo IdeaPad Z560, model 09143YU, and as I am not a > >>Windows fan I installed Linux Mint 11 Katya x64 to use instead of the > >>supplied W7. I was encountering a known hang and had to upgrade to a later > >>kernel, so I am now using the 2.6.38-11-generic #50-Ubuntu SMP Mon Sep 12 > >>21:17:25 UTC 2011 x86_64 kernel. > >> > >>I had my first occasion to use the laptop for an extended period for the > >>first time over the Thanksgiving holiday and I found it needed to be tuned. > >> I downloaded powertop and used it to discover where my problems were. > >> After addressing excessive i915 interrupts due to DRI the next most > >>frequent cause of CPU wakeups is a kworker on the system. A search lead to > >>a post by Tejun, indicating the need to trace such issues. Running the trace > >>showed that 1933 of 2748 events were of the form: > >> > >>-0 [000] 22005.355346: workqueue_queue_work: work > >>struct=ffff8800bb411188 function=do_dbs_timer workqueue=ffff88012b5d2c00 > >>req_cpu=0 cpu=0 > >> > >>Tejun indicated that this is a workitem used by cpufreq and likely caused by > >>something else hitting the CPU frequently. So how do I diagnose this > >>further and isolate the cause for correction? > >> > >>If you would like a summary of this, download this spreadsheet: > >> > >>http://home.comcast.net/%7Eddurgee/Tracelog.ods > >> > >>If you would like to inspect the trace log itself: > >> > >>http://home.comcast.net/%7Eddurgee/tracelog.zip > >> > >Hi Dave, > > > >I don't know the cpufreq code that well, but it seem that this > >workqueue is schedule periodically. You > >can examine the sampling rate via /sys: > > > >$ grep "" /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate* > > > >Just curious, are you running nohz: > > > >$ dmesg | grep -i nohz > > > >Regards, > >Mandeep > dhdurgee@DHD-Z560 ~/Downloads $ grep "" > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate* > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate:10000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate_max:4294967295 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate_min:10000 > dhdurgee@DHD-Z560 ~/Downloads $ dmesg | grep -i nohz > dhdurgee@DHD-Z560 ~/Downloads $ > > Does this explain what I am seeing? Does this square with the > observations in my spreadsheet? Does this suggest a means of > reducing these excessive wakeups? Is there more information I can > provide to suggest a course of action? > IIUC, you should be seeing 100 such events per second * number of CPUs. Is that what you are seeing? You could reduce this by changing HZ. Maybe change to CONFIG_HZ_100 in your .config from CONFIG_HZ_1000. That should reduce the number of events by a factor of 10. Regards, Mandeep > Dave