Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: measuring desktop responsiveness?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    20

    Default measuring desktop responsiveness?

    I'm one of many who are affected by kernel bug 12309 ( http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309 ) and as you can see, the major symptom is that desktop responsivness taking a hit during heavy I/O operations. Thing is, there is no way to measure desktop responsiveness objectively that I know of. Could it be possible to see PTS to include such a test in the future? it would be quite helpful and useful for future usage i'm sure

  2. #2

    Default

    I have an idea for possibly making an automated test of this... Will check when I am back in the office.

    Michael

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KhaaL View Post
    I'm one of many who are affected by kernel bug 12309 ( http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309 ) and as you can see, the major symptom is that desktop responsivness taking a hit during heavy I/O operations. Thing is, there is no way to measure desktop responsiveness objectively that I know of. Could it be possible to see PTS to include such a test in the future? it would be quite helpful and useful for future usage i'm sure
    Maybe you should try 2.6.30-rc3, because there are "some block IO scheduling fixes". Btw. is this bug confirmed by kernel devs? As I remember there was something about this or similar issue at lkml, but it wasn't really bug. What fs are you using? You suffer from this bug doing what operations? Are you using FUSE?
    Last edited by kraftman; 04-22-2009 at 04:35 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have an idea for possibly making an automated test of this... Will check when I am back in the office.

    Michael
    Great, I'm looking forward to try this out!

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Maybe you should try 2.6.30-rc3, because there are "some block IO scheduling fixes". Btw. is this bug confirmed by kernel devs? As I remember there was something about this or similar issue at lkml, but it wasn't really bug. What fs are you using? You suffer from this bug doing what operations? Are you using FUSE?
    Thanks for the suggestions. This bug is hard to confirm by the devs - or rather its hard to confirm the cause of the bug. so far I've experienced it on ext3, ext4 and reiserFS without any use of FUSE. I'll try .30-rc3 as soon nvidia release a driver compatible with it :-)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    Nvidia 180.53 works with 2.6.30.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Hannover
    Posts
    21

    Default

    There is a test case which makes it possible to measure the desktop responsiveness latencies.

    See comment:
    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309#c311

    Test case:
    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=21054

    The problem is, that this bug is not deterministic. You can create heavy io without notice the bug, but mostly there is the poor desktop responsiveness.

    See the three test results of 2.6.29 or 2.6.30-rc2-smp in the result log.
    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=21055

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    234

    Default

    I have the same issue with a box using XFS, I found it kind-of unexplainable, but going though that bug it makes sense now

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grigi View Post
    I have the same issue with a box using XFS, I found it kind-of unexplainable, but going though that bug it makes sense now
    Maybe only CFQ is affected? Does someone tried with another scheduler? And maybe it's already fixed in 2.6.30-rc3:

    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309#c313
    Last edited by kraftman; 04-23-2009 at 01:44 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Hannover
    Posts
    21

    Default

    This bug exists since 2.6.18 or even earlier. The real cause is unknowns. There were many tries to fix this bug in ext3 implementation, block layer, io scheduler or event cpu scheduler, without real improvements.

    bug in bugzilla

    bug in ubuntu's launchpad

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •