Re: Linux 2.4.18 Scheduler Bug?

From: Nick Piggin
Date: Thu Sep 18 2003 - 19:31:40 EST


Not that I know of unfortunately.

Vander Velden, Kent wrote:

Thank you for your response. I was affraid this might be the problem.
Is there anything that we can do now, i.e. is there a SMP kernel does
does consider priority?

Thanks.




-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Piggin [mailto:piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:48 PM
To: Vander Velden, Kent
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.18 Scheduler Bug?




Vander Velden, Kent wrote:



Please CC: responses to my email.

On two seperate SMP machines I run two instances of two

different programs, minimin.x and random_simplex. Both instances of random_simplex are niced to 20 on both machines. Both minimin.xand random_simplex are CPU bound processes. On the first machine the processes are allocated CPU as would be expected (data taken from 'top'):



Linux cn103 2.4.18-18.8.0smp #1 SMP Wed Nov 13 23:11:20 EST

2002 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux



PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND

25911 f459659 25 0 3452 3452 1032 R 94.3 0.1

167:13 minimin.x


25903 f459659 25 0 3604 3604 1072 R 93.4 0.1

168:03 minimin.x


26658 f493418 39 19 5396 5396 4188 R N 5.9 0.2

0:42 random_simplex


26682 f493418 39 19 5124 5124 4188 R N 5.9 0.1

0:42 random_simplex



However, on the second machine they are not:



Linux cn065 2.4.18-18.8.0smp #1 SMP Wed Nov 13 23:11:20 EST

2002 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux



PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND

26881 f459659 25 0 3452 3452 1032 R 55.6 0.1

137:03 minimin.x


27630 f493418 39 19 5272 5272 4188 R N 50.6 0.2

4:37 random_simplex


27654 f493418 39 19 5124 5124 4188 R N 50.6 0.1

4:37 random_simplex


26873 f459659 25 0 3564 3564 1072 R 44.7 0.1

137:19 minimin.x



Renicing the processes has not affect. Restarting the

processes seems to help. What might be


causing this? Are there any know bugs in the SMP schechuler

in 2.4.18 that might cause this?

The scheduler does not take priority into account when doing SMP
balancing.



Is there a workaround or does a more recent kernel fix this?



Not as far as I know. I'm working on it in 2.6.







This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless
explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended",
this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment,
or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute
a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing
purposes or for transfers of data to third parties.

Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean

http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html








-
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/