mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Uwe Kleine-Koenig <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: Dynamic ticks make system jerking
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:35:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070627163529.GA12978@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1182872749.11854.27.camel@chaos>

Hello,

Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 17:00 +0200, Uwe Kleine-K??nig wrote:
> > If I enable NO_HZ, the system jerks (I hope this is an understandable
> > term ...).   E.g. 
> > 
> > 	# time find /sys
> > 	...
> > 	real    1m 19.52s
> > 	user    0m 0.18s
> > 	sys     0m 0.15s
> > 
> > on a freshly booted machine.  The output comes in several hunks with
> > pausing between them.  With no_hz=off, I get approx. the same.
> 
> it's nohz=off not no_hz=off
Currently I'm not sure, which I was really using.  I think it was the
right one, because dmesg changed.  But anyhow, I will retest if I made
it wrong.
 
> > First I wondered why set_next_event is called twice between two timer
> > interrupts most of the time.  I found out that the timer is programed
> > for the next tick in any case and if nothing needs the next tick, the
> > interval is enlarged.  I didn't spend time yet to check if it is
> > easier/faster to only program the timer once.
> 
> We optimize for the non-idle path, i.e. we keep the timer running as
> long as we are not idle. Once we go idle we reprogram it.
OK, sounds sane.
 
> I looked at the patch and as far as I can understand it, there is
> nothing obviously wrong about it.
What a pity.

> One remark: why did you expand the clocksource to be 64 bit? The generic
> code handles the 32 bit wrap already, so the expansion in your read
> routine is adding overhead. The counter will wrap every 24 seconds, so
> there is nothing to worry about.
OK, I thought it to be better to have 64bit + some overhead.  I will
change that.
 
> The behavior you are describing is might be related to some problem with
> the clocksource readout, as the reprogramming values are calculated from
> there. 
Any hints how I can debug that?

Currently I cannot retest, but I will dig into it again and rereport.

Thanks for your answer.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Uwe Kleine-Koenig

http://www.google.com/search?q=speed+of+light%3D

  reply	other threads:[~2007-06-27 16:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-26 15:00 Uwe Kleine-König
2007-06-26 15:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-27 16:35   ` Uwe Kleine-Koenig [this message]
2007-06-29 22:33     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2007-06-30 19:08       ` Ingo Molnar

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=20070627163529.GA12978@informatik.uni-freiburg.de \
    --to=ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®