From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 2 13:55:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472E016A4CE for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:55:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from duchess.speedfactory.net (duchess.speedfactory.net [66.23.201.84]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C66F343D3F for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:55:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ups@tree.com) Received: (qmail 16261 invoked by uid 89); 2 Oct 2004 13:55:56 -0000 Received: from duchess.speedfactory.net (66.23.201.84) by duchess.speedfactory.net with SMTP; 2 Oct 2004 13:55:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 16251 invoked by uid 89); 2 Oct 2004 13:55:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO palm.tree.com) (66.23.216.49) by duchess.speedfactory.net with SMTP; 2 Oct 2004 13:55:56 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.tree.com [127.0.0.1]) by palm.tree.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i92Dtrmt032748; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 09:55:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ups@tree.com) From: Stephan Uphoff To: Peter Holm In-Reply-To: <20041002053351.GA6259@peter.osted.lan> References: <1095468747.31297.241.camel@palm.tree.com> <1096477932.3733.1471.camel@palm.tree.com> <1096489576.3733.1868.camel@palm.tree.com> <200409291652.29990.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <1096496057.3733.2163.camel@palm.tree.com> <1096603981.21577.195.camel@palm.tree.com> <1096608201.21577.203.camel@palm.tree.com> <20041001141040.GA1556@peter.osted.lan> <1096647194.27811.12.camel@palm.tree.com> <20041001192551.GA3381@peter.osted.lan> <20041002053351.GA6259@peter.osted.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1096725353.27811.836.camel@palm.tree.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 09:55:53 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: Julian Elischer cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: scheduler (sched_4bsd) questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 13:55:58 -0000 On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 01:33, Peter Holm wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 09:25:51PM +0200, Peter Holm wrote: > > > > > > > > For once I'm the bearer of good news. The switch_patch_v2 + the > > > > sched_4bsd patch ran the tests for more than one hour without > > > > any freeze. The sched_4bsd alone did not stop the freezes. I'm > > > > now testing the switch_patch_v2 alone and it's looking good for > > > > 55+ minutes of testing. > > > > > > Great ! > > > I guess I should roll a cleaned up cumulative patch soon. > > > > > > Stephan > > > > I have now been running the stress test for more than 3½ hours, without > > any freezes. I have included the two of your changes I have been using. > > > > - Peter > > After more testing, I'm sad to report that the freeze is still there. > The patch has however decreased the number of freezes dramatically: > > During 14 hours of testing 3 separate freezes has been seen: > > 24 Giant held for more than 60 sec by td 0xc244e900, pid 27683 > 31 Giant held for more than 60 sec by td 0xc1b7b600, pid 12098 > 79 Giant held for more than 60 sec by td 0xc25f3180, pid 75531 You should also run with MUTEX_WAKE_ALL in your config file AND the mutex patch. I think this is it but will verify later today. Sorry -have to run - will roll the cumulative patch tonight (EST). Stephan