From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>,
Jef Driesen <jefdriesen@telenet.be>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Slow pty's (was Re: libdivecomputer interfaces?)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:10:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100610181042.GA19210@puku.stupidest.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinLth4iKXAwszEEsPm_9ZDlj8HtqsiG5cdFE1cZ@mail.gmail.com>
(sorry if this reponse isn't on target, i was just pointed to this
thread a few minutes ago)
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:25:36AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I thought we long since (ie back last fall) fixed the latency
> problems with pty's, but there does seem to be something very fishy
> going on there still.
this might not be related, but i have slow serial ports with NOHZ that
goes away when i revert 39c0cbe2150cbd848a25ba6cdb271d1ad46818ad.
commit 39c0cbe2150cbd848a25ba6cdb271d1ad46818ad
Author: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Date: Thu Mar 11 17:17:13 2010 +0100
sched: Rate-limit nohz
Entering nohz code on every micro-idle is costing ~10% throughput for netperf
TCP_RR when scheduling cross-cpu. Rate limiting entry fixes this, but raises
ticks a bit. On my Q6600, an idle box goes from ~85 interrupts/sec to 128.
The higher the context switch rate, the more nohz entry costs. With this patch
and some cycle recovery patches in my tree, max cross cpu context switch rate is
improved by ~16%, a large portion of which of which is this ratelimiting.
and looking at the only two interesting hunks it's not clear why:
+int nohz_ratelimit(int cpu)
+{
+ struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
+ u64 diff = rq->clock - rq->nohz_stamp;
+
+ rq->nohz_stamp = rq->clock;
+
+ return diff < (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) >> 1;
+}
+ if (nohz_ratelimit(cpu))
+ goto end;
+
network latnecy is fine, and if i create lots of wakeups (network IO
is fine) then the serial port latency is noticable
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-10 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-10 17:25 Linus Torvalds
2010-06-10 18:07 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2010-06-10 18:10 ` Chris Wedgwood [this message]
2010-06-10 22:25 ` Brian Bloniarz
2010-06-10 22:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-16 15:03 ` Jiri Kosina
2010-06-16 15:16 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-17 6:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-17 7:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-17 10:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-17 13:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-17 14:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-06-17 14:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-17 14:56 ` Brian Bloniarz
2010-06-17 16:02 ` [PATCH] nohz: Fix nohz ratelimit Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-17 17:39 ` [tip:timers/urgent] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2010-11-12 18:45 ` Slow pty's (was Re: libdivecomputer interfaces?) Jef Driesen
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=20100610181042.GA19210@puku.stupidest.org \
--to=cw@f00f.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
--cc=jefdriesen@telenet.be \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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®