lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] Move calc_load call out from xtime_lock protection
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 06:53:45PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:51:36AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> > >
> > > > The xtime_lock is being held for long periods on larger systems due
> > > > to an extensive amount of time being spent in calc_load(),
> > > > specifically here:
> > > > do_timer->update_times->calc_load->count_active_tasks->nr_active()
> > > >
> > > > On a 64 cpu system I've seen this take approximately 55 usec.
> > > > Presumably it would be worse on larger systems. This causes other
> > > > cpus to be held off in places such as
> > > > scheduler_tick->sched_clock_tick waiting for the xtime_lock to be
> > > > released.
> > >
> > > I thought more about that. Why don't we move the calc_load() call into
> > > the timer softirq context and avoid fiddling with all the call sites ?
> > > Also moving calc_load out of the timer interrupt context reduces the
> > > interrupts off section as well.
> > >
> > Sounds reasonable to me.
>
> Ok. I looked once more and I wonder if it's possible to avoid the
> whole for_each_online_cpu() business by moving the accounting into the
> scheduler and be a bit more clever than just blindly running over all
> cpus everytime.
>
> /me goes back to stare a bit more at the avenrun stuff
>

Also, if my patch gets replaced by this, you might want to avoid saving intermediate results in calc_load, as my patch attempts to do.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-11 19:19    [W:0.036 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site