RE: Question about scheduling in 2.4.20
From: Ravinandan Arakali \(rarakali\)
Date: Fri Jun 15 2007 - 14:03:22 EST
I notice with our version, it's running 2.4.20 but has the O(1)
Specifically, we see that the process sleeps inside an ioctl for more
than 3 secs,
wakes up, comes out of the blocking call and is immediately scheduled
this, it's not scheduled for next 4 secs.
Does this look like a fairness/starvation issue ?
From: Ravinandan Arakali (rarakali)
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:02 AM
To: Linux Kernel
Subject: Question about scheduling in 2.4.20
I have a question about scheduling latencies in 2.4.20. We are seeing
that our process (started with default priority, normal fork, exec) is
not scheduled on the CPU for 4 seconds (from our kernel traces). Is that
possible under heavy load ? We believe the process is still alive but I
wanted to know if anybody has an idea from experimental results, about
the worst case scenario.
>From syscall trace, we also know that the process is not inside any
blocking system call.
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/