From: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
To: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
Cc: "Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"Luca Tettamanti" <kronos.it@gmail.com>,
"Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>,
"Alexander E. Patrakov" <patrakov@ums.usu.ru>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for testing] Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 17:07:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710051707.49458.elendil@planet.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <470562B9.6060200@redhat.com>
On Friday 05 October 2007, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> procfs: Don't read runtime twice when computing task's stime
>
> Current code reads p->se.sum_exec_runtime twice and goes through
> multiple type conversions to calculate stime. Read it once and
> skip some of the conversions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
This second patch is a major improvement. But both for kontact and amarok I
still see stime decreasing occasionally. Sometimes even still quite
frequently like in this series:
Oct 05 17:00:42 698 178
Oct 05 17:00:43 700 177
Oct 05 17:00:44 700 177
Oct 05 17:00:45 700 177
Oct 05 17:00:46 700 178
Oct 05 17:00:47 700 178
Oct 05 17:00:48 700 177
Oct 05 17:00:49 700 177
Oct 05 17:00:50 700 178
Oct 05 17:00:51 700 178
Oct 05 17:00:52 700 179
Oct 05 17:00:53 698 180
Oct 05 17:00:54 700 179
Oct 05 17:00:55 700 179
Oct 05 17:00:56 700 179
Oct 05 17:00:57 700 179
Oct 05 17:00:58 700 180
Oct 05 17:00:59 700 179
This was after 6 minutes of steady increases.
Should we try a debug patch that shows the raw data behind the calculations?
I'll give the first patch a try next.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-05 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-03 12:33 top displaying 9999% CPU usage Frans Pop
2007-10-03 12:52 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-03 13:03 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
2007-10-03 14:04 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-03 14:43 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 14:51 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 19:27 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top (was: top displaying 9999% CPU usage) Frans Pop
2007-10-03 20:24 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-10-03 23:32 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-04 19:19 ` Luca Tettamanti
2007-10-04 19:32 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 20:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 20:21 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 21:10 ` [PATCH for testing] " Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 22:01 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 22:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-05 11:43 ` Luca
2007-10-05 15:07 ` Frans Pop [this message]
2007-10-05 15:49 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-08 16:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-08 17:00 ` Ingo Molnar
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=200710051707.49458.elendil@planet.nl \
--to=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi \
--cc=kronos.it@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=patrakov@ums.usu.ru \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/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.