From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Bas van der Oest <bassvdo@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /proc/stat information incorrect
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:36:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120416143606.2ee7c571@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABWpNyZkL8K3R=ObOvV9SGMVGTcs1R83H0LSWyXFrQ-Wwb5p+w@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 10:04:48 +0200
Bas van der Oest <bassvdo@gmail.com> wrote:
> After dropping some zero columns and taking the difference between the
> statistics the reformatted result is:
> user nice system idle iowait irq softirq sum
> cpu 5 0 434 7676 0 0 53 8168
> cpu0 0 0 0 1067 0 0 0 1067
> cpu1 0 0 1 1070 0 0 0 1071
> cpu2 0 0 0 1071 0 0 0 1071
> cpu3 1 0 0 1070 0 0 0 1071
> cpu4 1 0 94 974 0 0 0 1069
> cpu5 2 0 92 535 0 0 52 681
> cpu6 0 0 82 987 0 0 0 1069
> cpu7 1 0 165 905 0 0 0 1071
>
> I added a sum column which totals the time spent in the different
> modes. The above table now shows how long each CPU was in what mode
> for how long.
> Now I am wondering how it is possible that CPU5 has spent much less
> time than all the other CPUs. I expected that all CPUs spent around
> the same time (10s). This time includes idle time so this is not
> related to the difference in active/idle CPUs.
>
> I know for a fact that this effect is related to which CPU is handling
> my IRQs; this effect happens to all CPUs if I map the interrupts to
> that particular CPU.
> I looked up the scheduler's statistics handling in the kernel source
> but was not able to find any cause for the above mentioned effect.
>
> Can anyone reproduce this behaviour?
> Does anyone know where/what might be the cause of this?
Assuming that you are on a recent kernel (>= 3.2), could you please
try to revoke git commit a25cac5198d4ff28 "proc: Consider NO_HZ when
printing idle and iowait times" and try again ?
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-16 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-16 8:04 /proc/stat information incorrect Bas van der Oest
2012-04-16 12:36 ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2012-04-17 8:04 ` Bas van der Oest
2012-04-20 12:06 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-25 7:24 ` Bas van der Oest
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=20120416143606.2ee7c571@de.ibm.com \
--to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=bassvdo@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.