On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 19:21 -0500, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:44:02PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 18:14 -0500, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
> > > [Meanwhile, I still have to switch contexts and look at the long
> > > softirq latencies that at first glance appear to be due to the use of
> > > mempool by the RAID1 bio code.]
> >
> > Can you post traces of them somewhere? There are no long running
> > softirqs in the two you posted (the worst is only 200 usecs or so).
>
> This is typical of what I'm seeing. It seems to be looping over lots
> of io request completions?
>
> -Bill
>
> preemption latency trace v1.1.5 on 2.6.16-rc6-git4-latency
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> latency: 1950 us, #8586/8586, CPU#0 | (M:desktop VP:0, KP:0, SP:0 HP:0 #P:1)
This looks very similar to what I see with my regular ATA drive (except
that the completions are handled in hardirq context).
You can cause less work to be done in each softirq by
lowering /sys/block/$DEV/queue/max_sectors_kb.
I would not consider ~2ms "long", there are some other softirqs that
induce 10-15ms latencies...
Lee
-
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]
