Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.0.4-rt13
From: Mike Galbraith <hidden>
Date: 2011-09-12 08:05:38
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 09:33 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011, Mike Galbraith wrote:quoted
I'm very definitely missing sirq threads from the wakeup latency POV. (Other things are muddying the water, eg. rcu boost, if wired up and selected always ramming boosted threads through the roof instead of configured boost prio.. etc etc, but this definitely improves my latency woes a lot) This is a giant step backward from "let's improve abysmal throughput", so I'm wondering if anyone has better ideas.One of the problems we have are the signal based timers (posix-timer, itimer).
That's the biggest part of my jitter troubles.
We really want to move the penalty for those into the context of the thread/process to which those timers belong. The trick is to just note the expiry of a timer and wake up the target which has to deal with the real work in his own context and on his own account. That's rather simple for thread bound signals, but has a lot of implications with process wide ones. Though it should be doable and I'd rather see that solved than hacking around with the split softirqs
That definitely sounds like a better idea.. for someone who thoroughly understands signals.
quoted
WRT below: "fixes" are dinky, this is not... sched, rt, sirq: resurrect sirq threads for RT_FULL Not-signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith [off-list ref]Not-that-delighted: tglx
Ditto. -Mike