|
|
* Bill Rugolsky Jr. <brugolsky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 8us : raise_softirq_irqoff (blk_complete_request)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 8us : __ata_qc_complete (ata_qc_complete)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 9us : ata_host_intr (nv_interrupt)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 9us!: ata_bmdma_status (ata_host_intr)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 16641us : nv_check_hotplug_ck804 (nv_interrupt)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 16642us : _spin_unlock_irqrestore (nv_interrupt)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 16642us : smp_apic_timer_interrupt (apic_timer_interrupt)
> <...>-2913 0d.h. 16642us : exit_idle (smp_apic_timer_interrupt)
ouch. The codepath in question (ata_host_intr()) doesnt seem to have any
loop that could take 16.6 msecs (!). This very much looks like some
hardware-triggered delay - some really screwed up DMA prioritization
perhaps, starving the host CPU for 16.6 msecs? But what DMA takes 16.6
msecs? That's enough time to transfer dozens of megabytes of data on a
midrange system.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at www.tux.org/lkml/">http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|
|