From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 18 08:54:52 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AAEE16A4CE; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:54:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from exchhz01.viatech.com.cn (ip-40-162-97-218.anlai.com [218.97.162.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0DEE43D2F; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:54:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Received: from freebsd.org (DAVIDWNT [10.4.1.99]) by exchhz01.viatech.com.cn with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id NAMYWJJZ; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:54:32 +0800 Message-ID: <40D2AE58.3040303@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:56:56 +0800 From: David Xu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030723 Thunderbird/0.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Watson References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: mike cc: Julian Elischer cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possible Threading problem with -CURRENT / MySQL? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 08:54:52 -0000 When this pthread program runs under ULE, I can not interrupt it pressing ctrl+c has no effect, I have this problem for a long time. http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/kse/locktest.c David Xu Robert Watson wrote: > ULE seems to do a very good job of scheduling interactive tasks over > other > workloads, resulting in a very "snappy" feel on my boxes, despite heavy > CPU load from background builds, etc. The workload I looked at had no > real "interactive" component, although it was a latency-centric RPC > test, > so timely hand-off as well as high throughput would be important. I > know > that Jeff's measurement work on ULE had a substantial focus on deadlines > -- whether or not ULE was timely in scheduling tasks, etc, and that he > demonstrated that it was much stronger than most other available > schedulers in this area. > > One of the next obvious steps in optimizing either ULE or 4BSD is going > to > be to spend a lot of time sitting with KTR(4) and looking at context > switch traces for "dumb things", such as bouncing between CPUs, rapid > switches back and forth, undo multiple wakeups, etc. > > Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects > robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >