public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [patch 0/2] NOHZ vs. profile/oprofile
@ 2009-05-28 15:04 Martin Schwidefsky
  2009-05-28 15:04 ` [patch 1/2] idle profile hits with NOHZ Martin Schwidefsky
  2009-05-28 15:04 ` [patch 2/2] keep on ticking if oprofile is active Martin Schwidefsky
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Martin Schwidefsky @ 2009-05-28 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel
  Cc: Rob van der Heij, Heiko Carstens, Ingo Molnar, Thomas Gleixner,
	john stultz

Greetings,
Rob pointed me to a deficiency with the current profile/oprofile
code together with NOHZ. For us this problem crept in with the
conversion of s390 to generic clock events, git commit 5a62b192
If the system is running with the HZ-tick disabled and the cpu spents
time in idle we see skewed percentages e.g. with the oprofile output.
On an I/O bound system the number of idle ticks is way to small. The
reason is that the generic clock events code reports either zero or
one tick to profile/oprofile on wakeup from idle even if the cpu has
slept much longer.
I've tried to fix that with the two patches in this series and
another pure s390 specific fix (profile_tick is called from
clock_comparator_work which is nonsense). These three do correct the
oprofile output on s390. The best idea I had to get oprofile in good
shape again is to let the system tick at the HZ rate while oprofile
is working. Better ideas welcome.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [patch 0/2] NOHZ vs. profile/oprofile v2
@ 2009-06-03 15:22 Martin Schwidefsky
  2009-06-03 15:22 ` [patch 2/2] keep on ticking if oprofile is active Martin Schwidefsky
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Martin Schwidefsky @ 2009-06-03 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel
  Cc: Rob van der Heij, Heiko Carstens, Ingo Molnar, Thomas Gleixner,
	john stultz, Andi Kleen

Greetings,
version 2 of the profile patches. The only change is the in_interrupt()
fix in tick_nohz_stop_idle(). I would like to know how to proceed with
the issue.
Andy, do you still prefer to handle the old style profiler analog to
the oprofile patch? If yes I would drop patch #1 and extend patch #2
with another tick_nohz_disable().

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2009-06-03 15:23 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-05-28 15:04 [patch 0/2] NOHZ vs. profile/oprofile Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-28 15:04 ` [patch 1/2] idle profile hits with NOHZ Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-28 20:19   ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-29 12:56     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-29 13:15       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-28 15:04 ` [patch 2/2] keep on ticking if oprofile is active Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-28 20:29   ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-29 12:57     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-29 13:14       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-01  8:09   ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-01 10:22     ` Martin Schwidefsky
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-06-03 15:22 [patch 0/2] NOHZ vs. profile/oprofile v2 Martin Schwidefsky
2009-06-03 15:22 ` [patch 2/2] keep on ticking if oprofile is active Martin Schwidefsky

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox