Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:10:18 +0200 | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: [patch] Latency Tracer, voluntary-preempt-2.6.8-rc4-O6 |
| |
* James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I have found a new problem though: > > # cat latency_trace > preemption latency trace v1.0 > ----------------------------- > latency: 1883455195 us, entries: 1 (1) > process: ksoftirqd/1/5, uid: 0 > nice: -10, policy: 0, rt_priority: 0 > =======> > 0.000ms (+0.000ms): cond_resched_softirq (___do_softirq) > > That looks bad to me. The user did not notice any latency, but 1883 > seconds seems like a high latency to me!
yeah, it doesnt look healthy. This could be some sort of tracing underflow - what is the 'grep MHz /proc/cpuinfo' value of your box?
Also, could you try the -P4 patch, it has a more robust timestamping mechanism.
Ingo - 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/
|  |