Higer latency with dynamic tick (need for an io-ondemand govenor?)

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-pm@...>
Date: Friday, April 18, 2008 - 11:43 am

Hi,

When capturing some traces with dynamic tick we were noticing the
interrupt latency seems to go up a good amount. If you look at the trace
the gpio IRQ is now offset a good amount.  Good news I guess is its
pretty predictable.

* If we couple this with progressively higher latency C-States we see
that IO speed can fall by a good amount, especially for PIO mixes.  Now
if QOS is maintained you may or may-not care.

I was wondering what thoughts of optimizing this might be.

One thought was if an io-ondemand of some sort was used.  It could track
interrupt statistics and be feed back into cpu-idle.  When there is a
high interrupt load period it could shrink the acceptable latency and
thus help choose a good a C-State which favors throughput.  Some moving
average window could be used to track it.

Perhaps a new interrupt attribute could be attached at irq request time
to allow the tracking of bandwidth important devices.

The attached is captured on a .22 kernel.  The same should be available
in a bit on a .24 kernel.

Regards,
Richard W.
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Woodruff, Richard, (Wed May 16, 7:20 pm)
Re: bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Thomas Gleixner, (Thu May 17, 6:10 am)
RE: bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Woodruff, Richard, (Thu May 17, 4:14 pm)
RE: bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Thomas Gleixner, (Thu May 17, 4:38 pm)
RE: bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Woodruff, Richard, (Thu May 17, 6:24 pm)
RE: bug seen with dynticks from CONFIG_HARDIRQS_SW_RESEND, Thomas Gleixner, (Fri May 18, 3:49 am)
Higer latency with dynamic tick (need for an io-ondemand gov..., Woodruff, Richard, (Fri Apr 18, 11:43 am)
RE: Higer latency with dynamic tick (need for an io-ondemand..., Woodruff, Richard, (Sun Apr 20, 10:21 am)
RE: Higer latency with dynamic tick (need for an io-ondemand..., Woodruff, Richard, (Sun Apr 20, 10:09 am)