Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753546AbZCVFwd (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:52:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751934AbZCVFwX (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:52:23 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:56815 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751837AbZCVFwW (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:52:22 -0400 Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:53:18 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Eric Dumazet , dipankar@in.ibm.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Question about usage of RCU in the input layer Message-ID: <20090321225318.5b25f0a7@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20090322051822.GG7148@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20090320065058.65d01771@infradead.org> <20090320143104.GA6698@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090320111354.679ab53d@infradead.org> <20090321012746.GM6698@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090321125115.0a76ac27@infradead.org> <49C54D60.80306@cosmosbay.com> <20090321210745.GE7148@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090321204045.4a9022fd@infradead.org> <20090322043838.GF7148@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090321215109.717a3f12@infradead.org> <20090322051822.GG7148@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1506 Lines: 43 On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:18:22 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > I'm measuring the time that the following code takes: > > > > init_completion(&rcu.completion); > > /* Will wake me after RCU finished. */ > > call_rcu(&rcu.head, wakeme_after_rcu); > > /* Wait for it. */ > > wait_for_completion(&rcu.completion); > > > > No, my confusion -- I misread as 2700 milliseconds rather than 2700 > -microseconds-. 2700 microseconds (or 2.7 milliseconds) is in the > expected range for synchronize_rcu() on an HZ=1000 system. 2.7 > seconds would of course be way out of line. > > > If the former, exactly which kernel are you using? The single-CPU > > > optimization was added in 2.6.29-rc7, commit ID a682604838. > > > > a bit after -rc8, specifically commit > > 5bee17f18b595937e6beafeee5197868a3f74a06 > > How many synchronize_rcu() calls are you seeing on the boot path? I see 20 that hit the above code path (eg ones that wait) until userspace starts. > Also, are you running with NO_HZ=y? of course... is there any other way ? ;-) -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- 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/