Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 14 Jul 2004 00:52:45 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: preempt-timing-2.6.8-rc1 |
| |
William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 05:28:05AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > >>>This patch uses the preemption counter increments and decrements to time >>>non-preemptible critical sections. >>>This is an instrumentation patch intended to help determine the causes of >>>scheduling latency related to long non-preemptible critical sections. >>>Changes from 2.6.7-based patch: >>>(1) fix unmap_vmas() check correctly this time >>>(2) add touch_preempt_timing() to cond_resched_lock() >>>(3) depend on preempt until it's worked out wtf goes wrong without it > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:36:00AM -0400, Joe Korty wrote: > >>You preemption-block hold times will improve *enormously* if you move all >>softirq processing down to the daemon (and possibly raise the daemon to >>one of the higher SCHED_RR priorities, to compensate for softirq processing >>no longer happening at interrupt level). > > > Plausible. Got a patch? >
Make MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART 1?
I don't think you should make ksoftirq a realtime task, because that defeats the purpose of having it to prevent livelocking userspace doesn't it?
However, you may want to increase it from nice +19. Probably just to nice 0 would be an idea. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |