From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757411Ab0I1GfN (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2010 02:35:13 -0400 Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:53378 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756488Ab0I1GfJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2010 02:35:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:35:05 +0200 From: Florian Mickler To: tmhikaru@gmail.com Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.35.6 Message-ID: <20100928083505.0a808ffd@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: <20100927233956.GA15705@roll> References: <20100927003608.GA20395@kroah.com> <20100927163208.GA4892@roll> <20100927215135.3d11d587@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100927233956.GA15705@roll> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6cvs31 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:39:56 -0400 tmhikaru@gmail.com wrote: > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 09:51:35PM +0200, Florian Mickler wrote: > > I can't comment on the bouncing part, but increased load average is > > partly bisected down in Bug 16525 (unexpected high load since 2.6.35 > > Bug 16525)[1]. Maybe you are seeing something similiar? > > If you're referring to > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16525 > > then I have to admit that's very interesting; in fact, I tested my machine > without X running, and the problem I'm having goes away entirely - loadavg > quickly settles to 0.00 - and even with *only* a mrxvt terminal running, > that is to say NO window manager, just mrxvt running, X on 2.6.35.3 and > later has the wildly bouncy load averages. That would of course lead one to think it happens somewhere in the gfx stack. > > Here's a graphical example of just how wacky this is: > > http://yfrog.com/6lloadbp > > In this image, the dip down to less than 0.5 after the 18'th is due to me > experimenting using the slackware distribution kernel (2.6.33.4) after I > finally noticed something was amiss. The sharp rise afterwards is due to me > first, building 2.6.35.5, and then afterwards, using it. To be perfectly > clear, I've previously used 2.6.34.2 and did not experience the problem > there either, nor is it in 2.6.33.4. What load figure are you basing your observations on? The 15 minutes average should be the most interesting (sampled at a 7 minutes interval...) Regards, Flo