From: Michael Buesch <mbuesch@freenet.de>
To: Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org>, Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staircase scheduler v7.4
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:48:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200406252148.37606.mbuesch@freenet.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040625190533.GI29808@alpha.home.local>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 25 June 2004 21:05, you wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 08:44:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
>
> > I don't know what the file wchan is good for, but here is
> > it's output:
> > mb@lfs:/proc/11000> cat wchan
> > sys_wait4
>
> I bet the process is waiting for a SIGCHLD from a previously forked
> process. Con, would it be possible that under some circumstances,
> a process does not receive a SIGCHLD anymore, eg if the child runs
> shorter than a full timeslice or something like that ? In autoconf
> scripts, there are lots of very short operations that might trigger
> such unique cases.
Hm. 11000 is a bash, so it forked some process. Just wanted to note,
that there are _no_ Zombies around, but this wait()ing bash.
load grows and grows:
top - 21:40:07 up 3:55, 7 users, load average: 10.59, 10.25, 9.99
Tasks: 91 total, 12 running, 79 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 13.7% user, 10.3% system, 76.0% nice, 0.0% idle, 0.0% IO-wait
Mem: 515624k total, 466520k used, 49104k free, 43144k buffers
Swap: 976712k total, 92k used, 976620k free, 207184k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command
2060 mb 39 19 38872 28m 2904 R 76.0 5.7 153:16.26 FahCore_78.exe
2270 mb 20 0 32428 7924 10m S 13.6 1.5 32:02.58 tvtime
2149 root 20 0 187m 41m 149m S 6.0 8.3 17:10.37 X
8936 mb 20 0 32736 20m 29m S 2.0 4.0 2:33.62 ksysguard
2238 mb 20 0 28628 15m 9m S 0.7 3.1 0:45.02 gkrellm
2315 mb 20 0 57052 11m 11m S 0.3 2.3 0:22.20 beep-media-play
8937 mb 20 0 2012 1072 1592 S 0.3 0.2 0:38.52 ksysguardd
1 root 20 0 1412 520 1252 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.30 init
2 root 39 19 0 0 0 R 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
3 root 10 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.16 events/0
... following more processes with 0.0% CPU.
As you can see, it's impossible to generate a load of 10.59 with these
few processes running. There are two processes running full time.
FahCore_78.exe at nice 19 and tvtime never uses more then 15% CPU.
But as the load grows, the system is usable as with load 0.0.
And it really should be usable with 76.0% nice. ;) No problem here.
This really high load is not correct.
- --
Regards Michael Buesch [ http://www.tuxsoft.de.vu ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFA3IGRFGK1OIvVOP4RAiemAKCnU2dTT9S3OWRRRKiFjYCfwVYk2gCeMVS6
nFs/eoY4VDwlQns4AK9te2c=
=NFUT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-25 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-25 16:40 [PATCH] Staircase scheduler v7.4 Michael Buesch
2004-06-25 16:46 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-25 18:44 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-25 19:05 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-06-25 19:48 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2004-06-26 1:11 ` kernel
2004-06-26 16:33 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-26 17:29 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-27 9:14 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 19:17 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2004-06-27 19:28 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-27 21:55 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2004-06-28 0:15 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-28 8:40 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2004-06-28 8:49 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-28 11:53 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2004-06-28 12:11 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-28 15:03 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2004-06-28 15:19 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-28 15:39 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2004-06-28 17:11 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2004-06-29 4:36 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-28 23:21 ` Peter Williams
2004-06-29 4:44 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-29 6:01 ` Ed Sweetman
2004-06-29 6:55 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-26 2:05 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 10:24 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 10:27 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 23:50 ` Peter Williams
2004-06-27 12:00 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 12:04 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 12:54 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-27 13:15 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-25 16:46 ` Michael Buesch
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-25 14:38 Con Kolivas
2004-06-25 18:32 ` Matthias Urlichs
2004-06-26 1:28 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-25 22:20 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-06-26 1:05 ` kernel
2004-06-26 20:04 ` Wes Janzen
2004-06-26 20:11 ` Michael Buesch
2004-06-26 21:14 ` Wes Janzen
2004-06-26 21:38 ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam
2004-06-27 9:16 ` Con Kolivas
2004-06-27 11:40 ` Grzegorz Kulewski
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=200406252148.37606.mbuesch@freenet.de \
--to=mbuesch@freenet.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@w.ods.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.