From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [.32-rc3] scheduler: iwlagn consistently high in "waiting for CPU"
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 22:34:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091008203426.GA1946@phenom2.trippelsdorf.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1255026217.6643.12.camel@marge.simson.net>
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 08:23:37PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 16:55 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 October 2009, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:24:16 +0200
> > > Subject: [PATCH] x86, timers: check for pending timers after (device)
> > > interrupts
> > >
> > > Now that range timers and deferred timers are common, I found a
> > > problem with these using the "perf timechart" tool.
> > >
> > > It turns out that on x86, these two 'opportunistic' timers only
> > > get checked when another "real" timer happens.
> > > These opportunistic timers have the objective to save power by
> > > hitchhiking on other wakeups, as to avoid CPU wakeups by themselves
> > > as much as possible.
> >
> > This patch makes quite a difference for me. iwlagn and phy0 now
> > consistently show at ~10 ms or lower.
> >
> > I do still get occasional high latencies, but those are for things like
> > "[rpc_wait_bit_killable]" or "Writing a page to disk", where I guess you'd
> > expect them. Those high latencies are mostly only listed for "Global" and
> > don't translate to individual processes.
>
> I still see very high latencies coming out of idle (last noted was >
> 300ms, NO_HZ) with this patch, and wonder if the hunk below makes any
> difference whatsoever for you. Here, it definitely does. (shouldn't)
I'm also seeing these strange, very high latencies here. Your patch
didn't help unfortunately.
This is from an otherwise idle NO_NZ system:
# ./perf sched latency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Task | Runtime ms | Switches | Average delay ms | Maximum delay ms |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ksoftirqd/0:4 | 2.216 ms | 170 | avg: 24.235 ms | max: 808.356 ms |
ksoftirqd/1:6 | 2.611 ms | 205 | avg: 4.334 ms | max: 165.553 ms |
migration/2:7 | 0.000 ms | 1 | avg: 3.060 ms | max: 3.060 ms |
With latencytop the ksoftirqd latency is over 1 sec frequently. (Could be
ondemand CPUfreq governor related?)
--
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-08 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-05 13:00 Frans Pop
2009-10-05 14:13 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-05 14:24 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-06 15:49 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-07 17:10 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-07 18:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-07 18:34 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-08 4:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 6:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 13:40 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-08 14:13 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 14:54 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 14:55 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-08 15:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-08 18:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 20:34 ` Markus Trippelsdorf [this message]
2009-10-09 3:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-09 3:51 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2009-10-08 20:59 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-09 3:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-09 6:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-09 7:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-09 7:55 ` Sedat Dilek
2009-10-09 8:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-09 14:23 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Update the clock of runqueue select_task_rq() selected tip-bot for Mike Galbraith
2009-10-09 16:27 ` [.32-rc3] scheduler: iwlagn consistently high in "waiting for CPU" Frans Pop
2009-10-09 20:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 15:30 ` [tip:timers/urgent] x86, timers: Check for pending timers after (device) interrupts tip-bot for Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-09 14:23 ` [tip:sched/urgent] Revert "x86, timers: Check for pending timers after (device) interrupts" tip-bot for Ingo Molnar
2009-10-08 11:24 ` [.32-rc3] scheduler: iwlagn consistently high in "waiting for CPU" Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 13:09 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-08 13:18 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-08 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-08 14:15 ` Mike Galbraith
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=20091008203426.GA1946@phenom2.trippelsdorf.de \
--to=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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®