Re: [PATCH] limit CPU time spent in kipmid

From: Corey Minyard
Date: Thu Mar 19 2009 - 17:31:44 EST


Martin, thanks for the patch. I had actually implemented something like this before, and it didn't really help very much with the hardware I had, so I had abandoned this method. There's even a comment about it in si_sm_result smi_event_handler(). Maybe making it tunable is better, I don't know. But I'm afraid this will kill performance on a lot of systems.

Did you test throughput on this? The main problem people had without kipmid was that things like firmware upgrades took a *long* time; adding kipmid improved speeds by an order of magnitude or more.

It's my opinion that if you want this interface to work efficiently with good performance, you should design the hardware to be used efficiently by using interrupts (which are supported and disable kipmid). With the way the hardware is defined, you cannot have both good performance and low CPU usage without interrupts.

It may be possible to add an option to choose between performance and efficiency, but it will have to default to performance.

-corey

Martin Wilck wrote:
Hello Corey, hi everyone,

here is a patch that limits the CPU time spent in kipmid. I know that it was previously stated that current kipmid "works as designed" (e.g. http://lists.us.dell.com/pipermail/linux-poweredge/2008-October/037636.html), yet users are irritated by the high amount of CPU time kipmid may use up on current servers with many sensors, even though it is "nice" CPU time. Moreover, kipmid busy-waiting for the KCS interface to become ready also prevents CPUs from sleeping.

The attached patch was developed and tested on an enterprise distribution kernel where it caused the CPU load of kipmid to drop to essentially 0 while still delivering reliable IPMI communication.

I am looking forward for comments.
Martin


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/