| To: | Linux-Xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | minor CPU wake-up question |
| From: | Linda Walsh <xfs@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 10 Nov 2007 15:38:44 -0800 |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809) |
I recently ran into "powertop" (fr. lesswatts.org) that shows how often interrupts awaken a processor under a tickless kernel. The display indicates the counts are over a 10 second period. Barring any disk activity, why would xfsbufd wake up each copy of itself up when there doesn't seem like there would be anything to do. Is a separate process really needed for each partition (that seems to be the case)? I don't know if it is 1 interrupt/bufd or 6 on 1, but it is fairly constant with 6 interrupts each period. FWIW, dirty_writeback_centiseconds is set to 1500(1499) and makes no difference in the count. It doesn't seem to be a big deal, other than it is at the top of the interrupt-chart with usually 60% or more of the ticks. Might be nice to not have it on top if it isn't necessary... 63.2% ( 6.0) xfsbufd : schedule_timeout (process_timeout) 21.1% ( 2.0) <kernel core> : clocksource_register (clocksource_watchdog) 2.1% ( 0.2) <kernel core> : __netdev_watchdog_up (dev_watchdog) 2.1% ( 0.2) <kernel core> : page_writeback_init (wb_timer_fn) 2.1% ( 0.2) <kernel core> : neigh_table_init_no_netlink (neigh_periodic_ 2.1% ( 0.2) init : schedule_timeout (process_timeout) 1.1% ( 0.1) xfssyncd : schedule_timeout (process_timeout) 1.1% ( 0.1) <kernel core> : init_nonfatal_mce_checker (delayed_work_time 1.1% ( 0.1) cron : do_nanosleep (hrtimer_wakeup) 1.1% ( 0.1) nscd : schedule_timeout (process_timeout) 1.1% ( 0.1) irqbalance : do_nanosleep (hrtimer_wakeup) 1.1% ( 0.1) <kernel core> : __neigh_event_send (neigh_timer_handler) 1.1% ( 0.1) <kernel core> : dst_run_gc (dst_run_gc) ---- |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: acl and attr: Fix path walking code, Andreas Gruenbacher |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: minor CPU wake-up question, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: acl and attr: Fix path walking code, Timothy Shimmin |
| Next by Thread: | Re: minor CPU wake-up question, Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |