On Saturday 11 March 2006 16:50, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Saturday 11 March 2006 16:33, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-03-11 at 14:50 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > On Saturday 11 March 2006 09:35, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * get_page_state is super expensive so we only perform it every
> > > > > + * SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX prefetched_pages.
> > > >
> > > > nr_running() is similarly expensive btw.
> > >
> > > Yes which is why I do it just as infrequently as get_page_state.
> > >
> > > > > * We also test if we're the only
> > > > > + * task running anywhere. We want to have as little impact on all
> > > > > + * resources (cpu, disk, bus etc). As this iterates over every
> > > > > cpu + * we measure this infrequently.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + if (!(sp_stat.prefetched_pages % SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX)) {
> > > > > + unsigned long cpuload = nr_running();
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (cpuload > 1)
> > > > > + goto out;
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, this is just wrong. If swap prefetch is useful then it's also
> > > > useful if some task happens to be sitting over in the corner
> > > > calculating pi.
> > > >
> > > > What's the actual problem here? Someone's 3d game went blippy? Why?
> > > > How much? Are we missing a cond_resched()?
> > >
> > > No, it's pretty easy to reproduce, kprefetchd sits there in
> > > uninterruptible sleep with one cpu on SMP pegged at 100% iowait due to
> > > it. This tends to have noticeable effects everywhere on HT or SMP. On
> > > UP the yielding helped it but even then it still causes blips. How
> > > much? Well to be honest it's noticeable a shipload. Running a game, any
> > > game, that uses 100% (and most fancy games do) causes stuttering on
> > > audio, pauses and so on. This is evident on linux native games, games
> > > under emulators or qemu and so on. That iowait really hurts, and
> > > tweaking just priority doesn't help it in any way.
> >
> > That doesn't really make sense to me. If a task can trigger audio
> > dropout and stalls by sleeping, we have a serious problem. In your
> > SMP/HT case, I'd start crawling over the load balancing code. I can't
> > see how trivial CPU with non-saturated IO can cause dropout in the UP
> > case either. Am I missing something?
>
> Clearly you, me and everyone else is missing something. I see it with each
> task bound to one cpu with cpu affinity so it's not a balancing issue. Try
> it yourself if you can instead of not believing me. Get a big dd reader
> (virtually no cpu and all io wait sleep) on one cpu and try and play a game
> on the other cpu. It dies rectally.
I happen to have a tool to instrument this as you're probably aware
(interbench). Here is an old log I found of this.:
--- Benchmarking simulated cpu of Gaming in the presence of simulated ---
Load Latency +/- SD (ms) Max Latency % Desired CPU
None 0 +/- 0 0 100
Write 36.5 +/- 103 966 73.3
Read 17.2 +/- 22.9 244 85.3
Note the max latency being massive and desired cpu dropping. This is on a HT
machine.
Cheers,
Con
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
