Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932410AbVLUNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 08:36:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932411AbVLUNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 08:36:34 -0500 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:63452 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932410AbVLUNge (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 08:36:34 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:36:41 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Lee Revell Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel Subject: Re: 2.6.14-rt22 (and mainline) excessive latency Message-ID: <20051221133641.GA7613@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@us.ibm.com References: <1135039244.28649.41.camel@mindpipe> <20051220042442.GA32039@elte.hu> <20051221014747.GB5741@us.ibm.com> <1135135970.28229.0.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1135135970.28229.0.camel@mindpipe> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1735 Lines: 39 On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 10:32:48PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 17:47 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 05:24:42AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Lee Revell wrote: > > > > > > > I captured this 3+ ms latency trace when killing a process with a few > > > > thousand threads. Can a cond_resched be added to this code path? > > > > > > > bash-17992 0.n.1 29us : eligible_child (do_wait) > > > > > > > > [ 3000+ of these deleted ] > > > > > > > > bash-17992 0.n.1 3296us : eligible_child (do_wait) > > > > > > Atomicity of signal delivery is pretty much a must, so i'm not sure this > > > particular latency can be fixed, short of running PREEMPT_RT. Paul E. > > > McKenney is doing some excellent stuff by RCU-ifying the task lookup and > > > signal code, but i'm not sure whether it could cover do_wait(). > > > > Took a quick break from repeatedly shooting myself in the foot with > > RCU read-side priority boosting (still have a few toes left) to take > > a quick look at this. The TASK_TRACED and TASK_STOPPED cases seem > > non-trivial, and I am concerned about races with exit. > > > > Any thoughts on whether the latency is due to contention on the > > tasklist lock vs. the "goto repeat" in do_wait()? > > It's a UP system so I'd be surprised if there were any contention. Couldn't there be contention due to preemption of someone holding the tasklist lock? Thanx, Paul - 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/