lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: preempt-timing-2.6.8-rc1
    On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 07:39:47AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

    > > 49ms non-preemptible critical section violated 1 ms preempt threshold
    > > starting at snd_pcm_action_lock_irq+0x1b/0x1d0 [snd_pcm] and ending at
    > > snd_pcm_action_lock_irq+0x65/0x1d0 [snd_pcm]

    woa

    > > 2) 49ms non-preemptible critical section violated 1 ms preempt threshold
    > > starting at sys_ioctl+0x42/0x270 and ending at sys_ioctl+0xbd/0x270
    > > 40-50 ms most of the time, 12 ms couple of times.
    > > Let me now if you need those traces for some of these (I've built kernel
    > > with 8K stacks).
    >
    > ioctl() is typically grossly inefficient and even involves the BKL.

    Indeed - but 49ms is stunning and worthy of investigation. The interesting
    thing is that sys_ioctl blankly locks the kernel, even if the systems below
    it don't need it. Would be a big change to fix.

    In this case, how about adding

    printk(KERN_DEBUG "ioctl cmd=%d\n", cmd);

    here in fs/ioctl.c:

    unlock_kernel();
    fput(filp);

    out:
    return error;
    }

    Or something else to instrument ioctl?

    --
    http://www.PowerDNS.com Open source, database driven DNS Software
    http://lartc.org Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:2.468 / U:2.836 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site