mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Swan <swan.r.l@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [bisected] pty performance problem
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:23:19 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091121222319.GA3905@swanrl.gmail.com> (raw)

I posted this to the kernel-newbies list, but have graduated to the
adults forum:

! Two C programs are having a query-response conversation through a
! pseudo terminal:
! 
! A (client) -- forever { send query; read response }
! B (server) -- forever { read query; send response }
! 
! Neither has any I/O apart from the pty conversation, so I'd expect to
! see CPU usage at 100%. When I ran it, the CPU was pretty well idle.
! After a fair bit of fiddling, it turned out that both sides were
! taking about 8ms for their read() calls. At that point it seemed
! pretty clear that this was a delay in the kernel, not the code.
! 
[snip]

2.6.31-rc2-00205-gb4b21ca good
2.6.31-rc2-00206-gd945cb9 bad

and still bad with the latest: 2.6.32-rc8-00011-ga8a8a66

the git log says:
! commit d945cb9cce20ac7143c2de8d88b187f62db99bdc
! Author: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
! Date:   Tue Jul 7 16:39:41 2009 +0100
! 
!     pty: Rework the pty layer to use the normal buffering logic
!     
!     This fixes the ppp problems and various other issues with call locking
!     caused by one side of a pty called in one locking context trying to match
!     another with differing rules on the other side. We also get a big slack
!     space to work with that means we can bury the flow control deadlock case
!     for any conceivable real world situation.
!     
!     Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>
!     Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

I can provide reasonably stripped down code which demonstrates the
problem.  It has been reproduced by one other person, though his delay
was about 2ms.

Have fun,

Rob.

             reply	other threads:[~2009-11-21 22:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-21 22:23 Robert Swan [this message]
2009-11-21 23:23 ` Alan Cox
2009-11-22  0:27   ` Robert Swan
2009-11-22 12:29     ` Alan Cox
2009-11-22 12:41       ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-22 21:37       ` Robert Swan
2009-11-22  6:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-22  7:15   ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-11-22 21:56     ` Robert Swan
2009-11-22 12:23   ` Alan Cox
2009-11-22 12:42     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-23  5:00     ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-23 10:28       ` Alan Cox
2009-11-23 11:31       ` Alan Cox
2009-11-23 11:48         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-23 11:59           ` Alan Cox
2009-11-23 12:04             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-23 13:34               ` Alan Cox
2009-11-23 17:48                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-07-09  6:29 ` Robert Swan

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=20091121222319.GA3905@swanrl.gmail.com \
    --to=swan.r.l@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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

Powered by JetHome