[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] cpuidle causing Dom0 soft lockups
>>> "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> 05.02.10 10:00 >>> >>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx] >>Sent: 2010å2æ5æ 16:49 >> >>Yes, this patch works for us too. So a non-hacky version of it would be >>appreciated. >> >>I also meanwhile tried out the idea to reduce the contention on >>xtime_lock (attached for reference). Things appear to work fine, but >>there is an obvious problem (with - thus far to me - no obvious >>explanation) with it: The number of timer interrupts on CPUs not on >>duty to run do_timer() and alike is increasing significantly, >>with spikes >>of over 100,000 per second. I'm investigating this, but of course any >>idea anyone of you might have what could be causing this would be >>very welcome. >> > >forgive my poor english. From your patch, only cpu on duty will invoke >do_timer to update global timestamp. Why in your test it's CPUs 'not >on duty' to have high frequent do_timer? I may read it wrong. :-( If you look at the patch, I added extra statistics for those timer interrupts that occur when a CPU is "on duty" (recorded as IRQ0, which is otherwise unused) and when not "on duty" (recorded as MCEs, since those hopefully(!!!) won't occur either, and in no case at a high rate). >From that I know that the rate of interrupts (not the rate of do_timer() invocations) is much higher on not-on-duty CPUs, but is roughly as without the patch for the on-duty one. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |