lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: CFS review

* Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > > [...] e.g. in this example there are three tasks that run only for
> > > about 1ms every 3ms, but they get far more time than should have
> > > gotten fairly:
> > >
> > > 4544 roman 20 0 1796 520 432 S 32.1 0.4 0:21.08 lt
> > > 4545 roman 20 0 1796 344 256 R 32.1 0.3 0:21.07 lt
> > > 4546 roman 20 0 1796 344 256 R 31.7 0.3 0:21.07 lt
> > > 4547 roman 20 0 1532 272 216 R 3.3 0.2 0:01.94 l
> >
> > Mike and me have managed to reproduce similarly looking 'top' output,
> > but it takes some effort: we had to deliberately run a non-TSC
> > sched_clock(), CONFIG_HZ=100, !CONFIG_NO_HZ and !CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS.
>
> I used my old laptop for these tests, where tsc is indeed disabled due
> to instability. Otherwise the kernel was configured with
> CONFIG_HZ=1000.

please send all the debug info and source code we asked for - thanks!

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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-01 14:25    [W:0.341 / U:7.512 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site