From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O6int for interactivity
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:18:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030718120229.01a8fcf0@pop.gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F1794F0.1090803@cyberone.com.au>
At 04:34 PM 7/18/2003 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
>>no_load:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 153 94.8 0.0 0.0 1.00
>>2.5.70 1 153 94.1 0.0 0.0 1.00
>>2.6.0-test1 1 153 94.1 0.0 0.0 1.00
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 152 94.7 0.0 0.0 1.00
>>cacherun:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 146 98.6 0.0 0.0 0.95
>>2.5.70 1 146 98.6 0.0 0.0 0.95
>>2.6.0-test1 1 146 98.6 0.0 0.0 0.95
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 146 98.6 0.0 0.0 0.96
>>process_load:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 331 43.8 90.0 55.3 2.16
>>2.5.70 1 199 72.4 27.0 25.5 1.30
>>2.6.0-test1 1 264 54.5 61.0 44.3 1.73
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 323 44.9 88.0 54.2 2.12
>>ctar_load:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 190 77.9 0.0 0.0 1.24
>>2.5.70 1 186 80.1 0.0 0.0 1.22
>>2.6.0-test1 1 213 70.4 0.0 0.0 1.39
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 207 72.5 0.0 0.0 1.36
>>xtar_load:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 196 75.0 0.0 3.1 1.28
>>2.5.70 1 195 75.9 0.0 3.1 1.27
>>2.6.0-test1 1 193 76.7 1.0 4.1 1.26
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 195 75.9 1.0 4.1 1.28
>>io_load:
>>Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
>>2.5.69 1 437 34.6 69.1 15.1 2.86
>>2.5.70 1 401 37.7 72.3 17.4 2.62
>>2.6.0-test1 1 243 61.3 48.1 17.3 1.59
>>2.6.0-test1-mm1 1 336 44.9 64.5 17.3 2.21
>
>Looks like gcc is getting less priority after a read completes.
>Keep an eye on this please.
That _might_ (add salt) be priorities of kernel threads dropping too low.
I'm also seeing occasional total stalls under heavy I/O in the order of
10-12 seconds (even the disk stops). I have no idea if that's something in
mm or the scheduler changes though, as I've yet to do any isolation and/or
tinkering. All I know at this point is that I haven't seen it in stock yet.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-18 10:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-16 14:30 [PATCH] O6int for interactivity Con Kolivas
2003-07-16 15:22 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2003-07-16 19:55 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
2003-07-16 17:08 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-16 21:59 ` Wiktor Wodecki
2003-07-16 22:30 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-16 22:12 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-07-17 0:33 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-17 0:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-07-17 1:12 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-17 0:48 ` Wade
2003-07-17 1:15 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-17 1:27 ` Eugene Teo
2003-07-17 3:05 ` Wes Janzen
2003-07-17 9:05 ` Alex Riesen
2003-07-17 9:14 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-18 7:38 ` Alex Riesen
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307251628500.26172-300000@localhost.localdomain>
2003-07-25 19:40 ` Alex Riesen
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307161241280.4787@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-18 5:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-18 6:34 ` Nick Piggin
2003-07-18 10:18 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2003-07-18 10:31 ` Wiktor Wodecki
2003-07-18 10:43 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-18 11:34 ` Wiktor Wodecki
2003-07-18 11:38 ` Nick Piggin
2003-07-19 10:59 ` Wiktor Wodecki
2003-07-18 15:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-18 16:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-07-18 17:05 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-07-18 17:39 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-07-18 19:31 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307181038450.5608@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-18 20:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-18 20:38 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307181333520.5608@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-19 17:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-21 0:21 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307201715130.3548@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-21 5:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-21 12:39 ` [NOTAPATCH] " Mike Galbraith
2003-07-21 17:13 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-18 14:24 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-18 15:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-18 13:46 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307180630450.5077@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-18 15:41 ` Mike Galbraith
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307180951050.5608@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.co m>
2003-07-18 18:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-07-16 20:20 Shane Shrybman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5.2.1.1.2.20030718120229.01a8fcf0@pop.gmx.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
--cc=zwane@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).