From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269101AbUHXXFp (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:05:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269108AbUHXXFL (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:05:11 -0400 Received: from gizmo06ps.bigpond.com ([144.140.71.41]:32192 "HELO gizmo06ps.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S269098AbUHXXEk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:04:40 -0400 Message-ID: <412BC984.6060408@bigpond.net.au> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:04:36 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: spaminos-ker@yahoo.com CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others) References: <20040824211141.13585.qmail@web13921.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040824211141.13585.qmail@web13921.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org spaminos-ker@yahoo.com wrote: > --- Peter Williams wrote: > > >>Could you try it in "pb" mode with both max_ia_bonus and max_tpt_bonus >>set to zero? That will disable all "priority" fiddling and tasks should >>just round robin at a priority determined solely by their "nice" value >>and since (according to your earlier mail) all the daemons have the same >>"nice" value they should just round robin with each other. > > > > Hi, I tried the latest V-5.0 patch over 2.6.8.1 in these conditions with the > actual server subsystem, and I get components timeouts :( > I also ran the watchdog script on the box while running the test, and saw > deltas of around 3 seconds every few hours: > > Tue Aug 24 03:02:13 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 3 > > Tue Aug 24 05:50:14 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 3 > > Tue Aug 24 09:05:24 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 4 > > Tue Aug 24 09:06:20 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 4 > > Tue Aug 24 09:36:22 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 3 > > Tue Aug 24 10:20:16 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 3 > > Tue Aug 24 13:28:19 PDT 2004 > >>>>>>>>delta = 3 > > > Could I do something more useful than just displaying those deltas? Maybe I > could dump the process list in some way, or enable some debugging code in the > kernel to find out what is going on? You could try Lee Revell's (rlrevell@joe-job.com) latency measuring patches and also try applying Ingo Molnar's (mingo@elte.hu) voluntary-preempt patches. Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce