Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8-rc2-O2

[Paulo Marques]

Thomas Charbonnel wrote:
> ....
> While accessing the file system (this one is very frequent):
>
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite (bash/5298): 1095us non-preemptible critical
> section violated 1000 us preempt threshold starting at
> search_by_key+0x120/0x1140 and ending at voluntary_resched+0x1a/0x70
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c010574e>] dump_stack+0x1e/0x30
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c01171a6>] touch_preempt_timing+0x36/0x50
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c042856a>] voluntary_resched+0x1a/0x70
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c0158c44>] __getblk+0x44/0x70
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c01ae348>] search_by_key+0x78/0x1140
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c01af4bc>]
> search_for_position_by_key+0xac/0x3f0
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c019e0c4>]
> reiserfs_allocate_blocks_for_region+0x354/0x15b0
> Aug  2 15:32:24 satellite [<c01a0c4c>] reiserfs_file_write+0x61c/0x8d0
                                         ^^^^^^^^
I remember some discussion on a "voluntary preempt" thread, about 
reiserfs being bad for latency.

You might search the archives for this, but as far as I remember, ext3 
was a better alternative, latency-wise.

--
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
"In a world without walls and fences who needs windows and gates?"
-
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/