From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Staszewski?= Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6] Re: rib_trie / Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2009 02:30:03 +0200 Message-ID: <4A4FF40B.5090003@itcare.pl> References: <20090630204141.GB3026@ami.dom.local> <4A4AA03D.5090808@itcare.pl> <20090701063651.GA4876@ff.dom.local> <20090701072409.GA12592@ff.dom.local> <4A4B2FA8.3040007@itcare.pl> <20090701101333.GB12715@ff.dom.local> <20090701110407.GC12715@ff.dom.local> <4A4BE06F.3090608@itcare.pl> <20090702053216.GA4954@ff.dom.local> <4A4C48FD.7040002@itcare.pl> <20090702060011.GB4954@ff.dom.local> <4A4FF34E.7080001@itcare.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Linux Network Development list , Robert Olsson To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Received: from smtp.iq.pl ([86.111.241.19]:56069 "EHLO smtp.iq.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753108AbZGEAaC (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Jul 2009 20:30:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A4FF34E.7080001@itcare.pl> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Oh I forgot - please Jarek give me patch with sync rcu and i will make tes= t=20 on preempt kernel Thanks Pawe=B3 Staszewski Pawe=B3 Staszewski pisze: > Jarek Poplawski pisze: >> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 07:43:25AM +0200, Pawe=B3 Staszewski wrote: >> =20 >>> Jarek Poplawski pisze: >>> =20 >>>> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 12:17:19AM +0200, Pawe=B3 Staszewski wrote= : >>>> =20 >>>>> Jarek Poplawski pisze: >>>>> =20 >>>> ... >>>> =20 >>>>>> So, after your findings I'm about to recommend sending to -stabl= e >>>>>> 3 patches from net-2.6, with additional lowering of threshold_ro= ot >>>>>> settings, but it would be nice if you could give it a try with >>>>>> CONFIG_PREEMPT instead of CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE (if it doesn't bre= ak >>>>>> your other apps!) It is expected to work this time...;-) Maybe a >>>>>> bit slower. >>>>>> >>>>>> =20 > Ok kernel configured with CONFIG_PREEMPT > and all this day work without any problems (with Jarek last patch). > > > So in attached file trere is fib_tirestats > I dont see any big change of (cpu load or faster/slower=20 > routing/propagating routes from bgpd or something else) - in avg ther= e=20 > is from 2% to 3% more of CPU load i dont know why but it is - i chang= e > from "preempt" to "no preempt" 3 times and check this my "mpstat -P=20 > ALL 1 30" > always avg cpu load was from 2 to 3% more compared to "no preempt" > > Regards > Pawe=B3 Staszewski > > >>>>>> =20 >>>>> Patch applied to 2.6.29.5 with CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE >>>>> And working :) >>>>> =20 >>>> Hmm... It should, because you tested very similar patch already;-) >>>> Sorry if I didn't make it clear. >>>> >>>> =20 >>> Yes i know there was almost identical one. >>> And i see this was without sync rcu :) >>> =20 >> >> Yes, it looks like we can't free memory so simple because of such hu= ge >> latencies.=20 >> =20 >>>>> fib_triestats in attached file >>>>> >>>>> I think I can test it with PREEMPT enabled but first i must make=20 >>>>> some other tests of my apps that are on server. >>>>> =20 >>>> It could probably matter only if you're using some broken out-of-t= ree >>>> patches. Otherwise the kernel is expected to work OK. >>>> >>>> =20 >>> Im a little confused about using of PREEMPT kernel because of past >>> there was many oopses / lockups :) but yes that was a little long=20 >>> time ago. >>> I will try to make this test today. >>> >>> =20 >>>> Btw., it would be also interesting to check if there is any differ= ence >>>> wrt. these route cache problems while PREEMPT is enabled. >>>> =20 >> >> And you're very right! The place we're fixing is the best example. O= n >> the other hand, I hope there is not many such places yet. But if we >> test/fix it there will be one less... >> >> Jarek P. >> >> >> =20 > > --=20 > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >