Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:43:14 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8.1-P0 |
| |
* Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> http://krustophenia.net/testresults.php?dataset=2.6.8.1-P0
nice. (What is the difference between the left-hand and the right-hand graphs - why is the right-hand side one 'wider'?)
> The peaks on this graph should correspond directly to the length of > the non-preemptible critical section reported by Ingo's latency > tracer. I think the large peak around 580-600usecs is caused by the > extract_entropy issue (which can be hit by regular processes and > ksoftirqd), and the large peak around 80-100 by the XFree86 unmap_vmas > issue, as the times match and these are by far the most common > reported in latency_trace.
just to check this theory, could you make __check_and_rekey() an empty function? This should still produce a working random driver, albeit at much reduced entropy. If these latencies have a relationship to the mlockall() issue then this change should have an effect.
Ingo - 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/
| |