On Sun, 3 Jul 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ok, found a bug that could explain the situation: mutex sleeps+wakeups
> were incorrectly credited as 'interactive sleep' periods, causing the dd
> processes to be boosted incorrectly. The dd processes created a workload
> in which they blocked each other in such a pattern that they got boosted
> periodically, starving pretty much every other task.
>
> the fix is significant and affects alot of workloads, and should further
> improve interactivity in noticeable ways. I'm not 100% sure it solves
> all the starvation problems (e.g. how could normal-prio dd tasks starve
> the SCHED_FIFO irq threads that drove SysRq?), but the results so far
> look promising.
>
> i've uploaded the -50-45 patch, can you under this kernel trigger a
> 'meltdown' on your SMT box?
Still looking into this issue on -51-06. Found something really odd:
SCHED_NORMAL tasks will start to inherit the priority value of some other
SCHED_FIFO task. If JACK is started at a given SCHED_FIFO priority, X and
all of its children will inherit the same priority value after login.
Other random processes will inherit this, too -- sometimes init...
SCHED_NORMAL tasks suddenly inheriting priority values in the range
normally reserved for SCHED_FIFO could explain at least part of the
meltdown I've been seeing. Any thoughts?
Cheers,
--ww
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |