Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: don't try to balance rt_runtime when it is futile

[Mike Galbraith]

On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 07:45 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: 
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 05:18:51AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 08:44 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > 
> > > In practice, not sure how much testing CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=y has received
> > > for -rt kernels in production environments.
> > 
> > I took 3.14-rt out for a quick spin on my 64 core box, it didn't work at
> > all with 60 cores isolated.  I didn't have time to rummage, but it looks
> > like there are still bugs to squash. 
> > 
> > Biggest problem with CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL is the price tag.  It just raped
> > fast mover performance last time I measured.
> 
> I do have a report of the RCU grace-period kthreads (rcu_preempt,
> rcu_sched, and rcu_bh) consuming excessive CPU time on large boxes,
> but this is for workloads with lots of threads and context switches.
> 
> Whether relevant or not to your situation, working on it...

RCU signal was swamped by accounting.

-Mike

--
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/