From: Subbaraya Sundeep <sbhatta@marvell.com>
To: <mingo@redhat.com>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
<juri.lelli@redhat.com>, <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
<dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
<bsegall@google.com>, <mgorman@suse.de>, <vschneid@redhat.com>,
<tj@kernel.org>, <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Query regarding work scheduling
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:40:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJsoMnkoYYpNzBNu@opensource> (raw)
Hi,
One of our customers reported that when their kernel upgraded from 6.1 to 6.6 then they
see more delay in their applications shutdown time.
To put in simple terms, dataplane applications are run with SRIOV VFs attached to them and
apps send number of mailbox messages to kernel PF driver (PF receives an mbox interrupt).
During interrupt handler work is queued and messages are processed in work handler.
I calculated the latencies (time between work queued and work execution start) of 6.1
and 6.16 and below are the observations
6.1 mainline
------------
Total samples: 4647
Min latency: 0.001 ms
Max latency: 0.195 ms
Total latency: 7.797 ms
Latency Histogram (bucket size = 0.01 ms):
0.00 - 0.01 ms: 4644
0.01 - 0.02 ms: 1
0.03 - 0.04 ms: 1
0.19 - 0.20 ms: 1
==================
6.16 mainline
-------------
Total samples: 4647
Min latency: 0.000 ms
Max latency: 4.880 ms
Total latency: 158.813 ms
Latency Histogram (bucket size = 0.01 ms):
0.00 - 0.01 ms: 4573
0.03 - 0.04 ms: 1
0.19 - 0.20 ms: 1
0.70 - 0.71 ms: 1
0.72 - 0.73 ms: 1
0.92 - 0.93 ms: 3
0.93 - 0.94 ms: 1
0.95 - 0.96 ms: 2
0.97 - 0.98 ms: 2
0.98 - 0.99 ms: 6
0.99 - 1.00 ms: 8
1.00 - 1.01 ms: 14
1.08 - 1.09 ms: 1
1.41 - 1.42 ms: 1
1.79 - 1.80 ms: 1
1.80 - 1.81 ms: 1
1.81 - 1.82 ms: 1
1.92 - 1.93 ms: 1
1.99 - 2.00 ms: 1
2.34 - 2.35 ms: 1
2.61 - 2.62 ms: 1
2.99 - 3.00 ms: 1
3.14 - 3.15 ms: 1
3.62 - 3.63 ms: 1
3.70 - 3.71 ms: 1
3.71 - 3.72 ms: 1
3.75 - 3.76 ms: 1
3.87 - 3.88 ms: 4
3.90 - 3.91 ms: 1
3.91 - 3.92 ms: 2
3.92 - 3.93 ms: 2
3.94 - 3.95 ms: 2
3.95 - 3.96 ms: 1
3.98 - 3.99 ms: 2
3.99 - 4.00 ms: 3
4.87 - 4.88 ms: 2
==================
As seen from histograms above, latency is more with 6.16 kernel.
Above is tested on uniprocessor system. SMP is fine since work is
scheduled to all cores. Please let me know what is going on and
provide some pointers if am missing very basic here.
I changed only kernel images. Application and rootfs are same in
both cases (to ensure no additonal daemons or load in 6.16 case)
Let me know if there is any knob in 6.16 to have same
behavior as 6.1.
Scheduler features of 6.16 are as below:
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features
PLACE_LAG PLACE_DEADLINE_INITIAL PLACE_REL_DEADLINE RUN_TO_PARITY PREEMPT_SHORT
NO_NEXT_BUDDY PICK_BUDDY CACHE_HOT_BUDDY DELAY_DEQUEUE DELAY_ZERO
WAKEUP_PREEMPTION NO_HRTICK NO_HRTICK_DL NONTASK_CAPACITY TTWU_QUEUE
SIS_UTIL NO_WARN_DOUBLE_CLOCK RT_PUSH_IPI NO_RT_RUNTIME_SHARE NO_LB_MIN
ATTACH_AGE_LOAD WA_IDLE WA_WEIGHT WA_BIAS UTIL_EST NO_LATENCY_WARN
Thanks,
Sundeep
next reply other threads:[~2025-08-12 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-12 11:40 Subbaraya Sundeep [this message]
2025-08-12 18:52 ` Query regarding work scheduling Tejun Heo
2025-08-14 3:54 ` Subbaraya Sundeep
2025-08-14 9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-19 11:18 ` Subbaraya Sundeep
2025-08-14 17:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-08-19 11:36 ` Subbaraya Sundeep
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=aJsoMnkoYYpNzBNu@opensource \
--to=sbhatta@marvell.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).