Bah, I notice that I poked reply. Doesn't matter, but for interested
readers...
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 15:31 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > I'll try this patch later (errands).
> >
> > This is sched-devel with your first patch still applied. Much evilness.
> > At first, I had much idle
Bah, I notice that I poked reply. Doesn't matter, but for interested
readers...
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 15:31 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
I'll try this patch later (errands).
This is sched-devel with your first patch still applied. Much evilness.
At first, I had much idle time, then
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 13:50 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:38:24AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Here, it does not. It seems fine without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.
>
> My hunch is its because of the vruntime driven preemption which shoots
> up latencies (and the
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:38:24AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Here, it does not. It seems fine without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.
My hunch is its because of the vruntime driven preemption which shoots
up latencies (and the fact perhaps that Peter hasnt't focused more on SMP case
yet!).
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:38:24AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Here, it does not. It seems fine without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.
My hunch is its because of the vruntime driven preemption which shoots
up latencies (and the fact perhaps that Peter hasnt't focused more on SMP case
yet!).
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 13:50 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:38:24AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Here, it does not. It seems fine without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.
My hunch is its because of the vruntime driven preemption which shoots
up latencies (and the fact
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 05:28 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > > The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
> > > difference it makes with
* Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
> > difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
> > CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED turned on.
>
> well, I
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
> difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
> CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED turned on.
well, I tried the patch against 2.6.25-rc2-git1. It seems to be better
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED turned on.
well, I tried the patch against 2.6.25-rc2-git1. It seems to be better
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED turned on.
well, I tried the
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 05:28 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:56:09PM +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed short thread in LKM regarding "sched: add vslice" causes horrible
> interactivity under load.
>
> I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
> keyboard suffers from huge latencies,
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:56:09PM +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
Hello,
I noticed short thread in LKM regarding sched: add vslice causes horrible
interactivity under load.
I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
keyboard suffers from huge latencies, I can
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:45:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > see my previous mail to Ingo (you were Cc.), latency top says that Xorg and
> > gnome-terminal suffers 300+ms latency in scheduler: waiting for cpu.
>
> what happens when you turn CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED off?
If I disable
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:36 +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:36:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I can't reproduce this with a pure cpu load. I started 10
> > while :; do :; done &
> > instances and aside from slowing down, nothing bad happened.
>
> yes, while
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:36:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I can't reproduce this with a pure cpu load. I started 10
> while :; do :; done &
> instances and aside from slowing down, nothing bad happened.
yes, while true; do true; does nothing wrong. But running make -j2 in kernel
* Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:01:32PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
> > > sched_slice.
> >
> > could you tell me more about
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:01:32PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
> > sched_slice.
>
> could you tell me more about this oops? You booted unmodified, latest
> -git and it oopsed
* Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
> sched_slice.
could you tell me more about this oops? You booted unmodified, latest
-git and it oopsed in sched_slice()? The patch below should work around
any oopses in
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:17 +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
> Ingo,
>
> any progress here? I've tried to revert this patch:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=67e9fb2a39a1d454218d50383094940982be138f
>
> as it was marked as suspicious patch in this
Ingo,
any progress here? I've tried to revert this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=67e9fb2a39a1d454218d50383094940982be138f
as it was marked as suspicious patch in this case
Ingo,
any progress here? I've tried to revert this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=67e9fb2a39a1d454218d50383094940982be138f
as it was marked as suspicious patch in this case
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 12:17 +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
Ingo,
any progress here? I've tried to revert this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=67e9fb2a39a1d454218d50383094940982be138f
as it was marked as suspicious patch in this case
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:01:32PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
sched_slice.
could you tell me more about this oops? You booted
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:36:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't reproduce this with a pure cpu load. I started 10
while :; do :; done
instances and aside from slowing down, nothing bad happened.
yes, while true; do true; does nothing wrong. But running make -j2 in kernel
sources or
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:36 +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:36:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
I can't reproduce this with a pure cpu load. I started 10
while :; do :; done
instances and aside from slowing down, nothing bad happened.
yes, while true; do
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:45:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
see my previous mail to Ingo (you were Cc.), latency top says that Xorg and
gnome-terminal suffers 300+ms latency in scheduler: waiting for cpu.
what happens when you turn CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED off?
If I disable
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
sched_slice.
could you tell me more about this oops? You booted unmodified, latest
-git and it oopsed in sched_slice()? The patch below should work around
any oopses in sched_slice().
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:01:32PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but in such a case, kernel 2.6.24-git13 does oops at startup in
sched_slice.
could you tell me more about this oops? You booted unmodified, latest
-git and it oopsed in
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:29:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> if you apply the current sched-fixes (rollup patch below), does it get
> any better?
No.
Another observation, running two instances of while true; do true; done (on
1 dual core cpu) does not break interactivity.
running make
* Lukas Hejtmanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed short thread in LKM regarding "sched: add vslice" causes
> horrible interactivity under load.
>
> I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
> keyboard suffers from huge latencies, I can see letters appearing
* Lukas Hejtmanek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed short thread in LKM regarding sched: add vslice causes
horrible interactivity under load.
I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
keyboard suffers from huge latencies, I can see letters appearing with
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:29:19AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
if you apply the current sched-fixes (rollup patch below), does it get
any better?
No.
Another observation, running two instances of while true; do true; done (on
1 dual core cpu) does not break interactivity.
running make clean;
Hello,
I noticed short thread in LKM regarding "sched: add vslice" causes horrible
interactivity under load.
I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
keyboard suffers from huge latencies, I can see letters appearing with delay
(typing into xterm). No swap is used at
Hello,
I noticed short thread in LKM regarding sched: add vslice causes horrible
interactivity under load.
I can see similar behavior. If I stress both CPU cores, even typing on
keyboard suffers from huge latencies, I can see letters appearing with delay
(typing into xterm). No swap is used at
36 matches
Mail list logo
