From: Delayed Mail (null++at++atlantis.com)
Date: 02/01/2000 07:14:31
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcin Romaszewicz" <marcin++at++asmodean.engr.sgi.com>
To: "eylon" <eylon++at++bvr.co.il>
Cc: "performer" <info-performer++at++sgi.com>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: problem with performer priorities
>
> Hi Eylon,
>
> What you're seeing is a problem with some of the libc functions that
> performer uses. We're aware of this problem and we're working on fixing it
> right now. Until we can find a workaround in performer, or get the libc
> functions fixed, you shouldn't put two realtime processes on a single cpu.
>
> I would suggest running compute at a normal (timeshare) priority, since
> it's performance isn't critical to overall performance. That leaves 7
> realtime processes and 6 cpu's, we need to find a way to reduce that. If
> your two culls are cheap, isolate a CPU and put them both on it with a
> timeshare priority. Since the cpu is isolated, no other processes will run
> there, so your two culls will behave like they're realtime anyway. If you
> can't put the culls on one cpu, try seeing if running app in a timeshare
> priority is acceptable.
>
> Also, in irix 6.5+, do not set the priority of any performer process
> higher than 89. The priorities the os runs certain services at have
> changed since irix 6.4 days. The priority bands look like this:
>
> priorty description
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 255 Reserved c-a thread
> 240-254 Hard real time
> 200-239 Interrupt threads
> 110-199 Interactive real time
> 90-109 System daemons
> 0-89 Soft real time
> (-1) Batch
> (-3)-(-2) Timeshare
> (-4) Batch
> (-5) Weightless
>
>
> So, your priority of 110 for the culls would run them above system
> daemons, which can cause problems.
>
> -- Marcin
>
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, eylon wrote:
>
> > hi performers
> >
> > I have 8 processes (3 * DRAW + 3 * CULL + APP + COMPUTE) running on 6
> > cpu's.
> > DRAW0, DRAW1, DRAW2 and CULL0 are running each one on its own cpu, CULL1
> > and the COMPUTE are running on one cpu and so are CULL2 and APP.
> > I tried to set CULL1 and CULL2 priority to 110 and all other priorities
> > to 90.
> > In order to lock the cpu's and set the priorities i used the functions
> > from libpfutil/lockcpu.c.
> >
> > When using the old system call schedctl() it works fine except that it
> > does not work on 6.5.
> > On 6.5 when using the new system call sched_setscheduler(), a few
> > seconds after the priorities where set the performer processes
> > seem to enter some deadlock and they just stuck.
> >
> > I tried to change the priorities to be equal, to set the priorities
> > without locking the cpu's, to change the scheduler
> > policy to fifo and then to round-robin but nothing help
> >
> > does anyone familiar with the problem or has any idea what's going on
> > here ???
> >
> > thanks in advance
> >
> > Eylon.
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/software/performer/
> > Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
> > Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
> >
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/software/performer/
> Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
> Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2000 - 07:15:22 PST