Re: [RT LATENCY] 249 microsecond latency caused by slub'sunfreeze_partials() code.

From: Christoph Lameter
Date: Fri Mar 22 2013 - 11:51:36 EST

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> The ffffffff8115517a is just before put_cpu_partial() which calls
> unfreeze_partials() with irqs disabled. So I started tracing again, this
> time with:

Hmmm... That is strange. unfreeze_partials should be rather fast.

> It ran for 249.51 microseconds!!! With interrupts disabled! This was
> what caused the interrupt to go off late. I have no idea why adding
> tracing makes this latency go away. Perhaps it changes the timings just
> enough to not let things line up?
> I did a report with '-R' and showing the raw events, which will show the
> exit part of the function graph we have:
> <...>-80563 14d...0 262219.108982: funcgraph_entry: func=0xffffffff81154954 depth=0
> <...>-80563 14d...0 262219.109233: funcgraph_exit: func=0xffffffff81154954 calltime=0xee7ca4d8200f rettime=0xee7ca4dbeeb5 overrun=0x0 depth=0
> <...>-80563 14d...0 262219.109233: funcgraph_entry: func=0xffffffff81528e47 depth=0
> The funcgraph_exit is within the same microsecond the
> smp_apic_timer_interrupt() went off, so yes this is what delayed it.
> Anyway, this is run on 3.6.11-rt30, but looking at the current code, it
> doesn't look like it changed in any meaningful way. The while ((page =
> c->partial)) makes me nervous. How big can this list be? Is there a way
> to limit the amount this can run?

The control is via the cpu_partial field in /sys/kernel/slab/<cache>/

There is also slabs_cpu_partial which gives a view as to how many objects
are cached in each per cpu structure. Do a cat

/sys/kernel/*/slabs_cpu_partial to get a view of what the situation is.
Any abnormally high numbers?

The default for the number of per cpu partial objects should be 30 or so.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at