On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 04:46:37PM -0800, Chen, Tim C wrote:
> Bill Huey (hui) wrote:
> > Can you sort the output ("sort -n" what ever..) and post it without
> > the zeroed entries ?
> >
> > I'm curious about how that statistical spike compares to the rest of
> > the system activity. I'm sure that'll get the attention of Peter as
> > well and maybe he'll do something about it ? :)
...
> @contention events = 247149
> @failure_events = 146
> @lookup_failed_scope = 175
> @lookup_failed_static = 43
> @static_found = 16
> [1, 113, 77 -- 32768, 0] {tcp_init, net/ipv4/tcp.c, 2426}
> [2, 759, 182 -- 1, 0] {lock_kernel, -, 0}
> [13, 0, 7 -- 4, 0] {kmem_cache_free, -, 0}
> [25, 3564, 9278 -- 1, 0] {lock_timer_base, -, 0}
> [56, 9528, 24552 -- 3, 0] {init_timers_cpu, kernel/timer.c, 1842}
> [471, 52845, 17682 -- 10448, 0] {sock_lock_init, net/core/sock.c, 817}
> [32251, 9024, 242 -- 256, 0] {init, kernel/futex.c, 2781}
> [173724, 11899638, 9886960 -- 11194, 0] {mm_init, kernel/fork.c, 369}
Thanks, the numbers look a bit weird in that the first column should
have a bigger number of events than that second column since it is a
special case subset. Looking at the lock_stat_note() code should show
that to be the case. Did you make a change to the output ?
I can't tell which are "steal", actively running or overall contention
stats against the lock from your output.
Thanks
bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
