Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:38:46 -0600 | From | "K.R. Foley" <> | Subject | Re: Real-Time Preemption, comparison to 2.6.10-mm1 |
| |
Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com wrote: >>On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 14:11 -0600, Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com wrote: >> >>>The non RT application starvation for mm1 was much less >>>pronounced but still present. I could watch the disk light >>>on the last two tests & see it go out (and stay out) for an >>>extended period. It does not make sense to me that a single RT >>>application (on a two CPU machine) and a nice'd non RT application >>>can cause this starvation behavior. This behavior was not >>>present on the 2.4 kernels and seems to be a regression to me. > > >>I think I am seeing this problem too. It doesn't just apply to RT >>tasks, it seems that CPU bound tasks starve each other. I noticed that >>with the RT kernel, a kernel compile or dpkg will starve evolution, to >>the point where it takes 30 seconds to display a message. If I go and >>background the CPU hog, the message renders _instantly_. > > >>It's definitely present with 2.6.10-rc2 + RT (PK config) and absent with >>2.6.10 vanilla. I need to figure out whether -mm has the problem. > > My point was that -mm definitely has the problem (though to a lesser > degree). The tests I ran showed it on both the disk read and disk copy > stress tests. I guess I should try a vanilla 2.6.10 run as well to see > if it is something introduced in the -mm series (it certainly is not a > recent change...). > > --Mark H Johnson > <mailto:Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com> > > I'm curious if anyone is seeing this behavior on UP systems, or is it only happening on SMP?
kr - 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/
| |