From: Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
To: Christophe Raffalli <Christophe.Raffalli@univ-savoie.fr>
Cc: caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Thread and kernel 2.6 pb still there in CVS
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:08:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040628150805.GC7353@yquem.inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40DC38D3.4010009@univ-savoie.fr>
> I tried to submit a change in vouillon's entry in the bug tracking
> system (classed as not a bug because can not reproduce), but as I am not
> sure it worked, So I also post this here
You should be grateful to Olivier Andrieu, who actually cared to
submit a bug report along with useful info on 2.6 kernels.
> In the latest CVS of ocaml there is still the periodic call Thread.yield
> (through a sigalarm) in thread_posix.ml
Yes, and that is necessary to get preemptive scheduling. Without this
periodic Thread.yield, a thread that performs no I/O and no
inter-thread communications would prevent all other Caml threads from
running at all.
> This implies that a threaded OCaml program ON A LINUX KERNEL 2.6 (at
> least 2.6.3 on Mandrake 10, but probaby all 2.6) gets very little CPU
> when another process is running (the usual figure is 10% CPU for the
> threaded OCaml program against 90% for another program)
Thread.yield does three things:
- release the global Caml mutex, giving other Caml threads a chance
to grab it and run;
- call sched_yield() to suggest the kernel scheduler that now is
a good time to schedule another thread;
- re-acquire the global Caml mutex before returning to the caller.
The 2.6 Linux kernels changed the behavior of sched_yield() in a way
that causes the unfairness you observed. Other threaded applications
are affected, including Open Office (!). My belief is that it's
really a bug in 2.6 kernels and that the new behavior of sched_yield(),
while technically conformant to the POSIX specs, lowers the quality of
implementation quite a lot.
(I seem to remember from my LinuxThreads development days that this
isn't the first time the kernel developers broke sched_yield(), then
realized their error.)
The question I'm currently investigating is whether the call to
sched_yield() can be omitted, as it's just a scheduling hint. Initial
experiments suggested that this would hurt fairness (in Caml thread
scheduling) quite a lot on all platforms other than Linux 2.6.
More careful experiments that I'm currently conducting suggest that it
might not be so bad. One can also play games where sched_yield()
isn't called if there are no other Caml threads waiting for the global
Caml mutex.
In summary, a solution will eventually be found, but please be
patient, and submit a bug report next time.
- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-28 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-22 22:41 [Caml-list] Why must types be always defined at the top level? Richard Jones
2004-06-22 22:53 ` Markus Mottl
2004-06-22 23:32 ` skaller
2004-06-23 12:01 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-06-23 14:45 ` skaller
2004-06-23 16:28 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-06-23 20:21 ` skaller
2004-06-23 20:52 ` skaller
2004-06-24 14:27 ` John Hughes
2004-06-24 16:47 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-06-24 17:30 ` Markus Mottl
2004-06-24 17:45 ` Xavier Leroy
2004-06-24 19:46 ` John Hughes
2004-06-24 19:56 ` David Brown
2004-06-24 19:57 ` William D. Neumann
2004-06-24 20:13 ` Olivier Andrieu
2004-06-24 23:26 ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-25 10:20 ` skaller
2004-06-25 11:07 ` Basile Starynkevitch [local]
2004-06-25 12:30 ` skaller
2004-06-25 14:38 ` [Caml-list] Thread and kernel 2.6 pb still there in CVS Christophe Raffalli
2004-06-25 16:08 ` [Caml-list] " Marco Maggesi
2004-06-25 16:32 ` Markus Mottl
2004-06-28 15:08 ` Xavier Leroy [this message]
2004-06-28 18:50 ` [Caml-list] " Benjamin Geer
2004-06-29 2:26 ` Christophe Raffalli
[not found] ` <7AFB5F64-C944-11D8-975C-00039310CAE8@inria.fr>
[not found] ` <40E11621.3050709@univ-savoie.fr>
2004-07-05 15:14 ` Christophe Raffalli
2004-07-05 16:34 ` Xavier Leroy
2004-07-06 9:33 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-08 13:51 ` Christophe Raffalli
2004-07-08 15:03 ` Xavier Leroy
2004-07-09 23:21 ` Donald Wakefield
2004-07-10 10:56 ` Damien Doligez
2004-06-24 23:23 ` [Caml-list] Why must types be always defined at the top level? Brian Hurt
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406241813370.4202-100000@localhost.localdom ain>
2004-06-26 23:08 ` Dave Berry
2004-06-25 1:59 ` Yaron Minsky
2004-06-24 23:08 ` Brian Hurt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040628150805.GC7353@yquem.inria.fr \
--to=xavier.leroy@inria.fr \
--cc=Christophe.Raffalli@univ-savoie.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox