ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

Hi guys,

I have beed working on my gentoo using ext3 for all partitions so then I have 
heard that ReiserFS is much better/faster and indeed it is BUT since I 
switched to ReiserFS I can't do:
Code:
# nice -n -20 emerge some_app_name

The idea is I can do this BUT can't do any thing else...notice to your self 
that I never had this problem while using ext3.

While I have used ext3 I could do "nice -n -10 emerge some_app" and also use 
xfree+xfce4 without problems but with ReiserFS if I do use value less than 0 
for "nice" then the cpu jumps to 100% usage and blocks me out from doing 
something else :-(

Any clue what is going on?
Maybe ReiserFS uses the cpu harder?

(
I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple emerge 
loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%
)

INFO:
-------
$ uname -a
Linux localhost.localhomain 2.4.20-ck3 #1 Thu Feb 27 22:09:05 IST 2003 i686 
Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.50GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
(default-x86-1.4, gcc-3.2.2, glibc-2.3.1-r2)

My kernel is vanilla-sources from kernel.org and with the following patches:
$ ls
001_o1_pe_ll_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2    008_vh_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
002_aavm_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2        010_tune_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
003_rl2_021215_ck.2.4.20.patch.bz2         011_vt_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
005_supermount_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2  13_gcc31-compile-optimizations
007_acpi_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2

COMPILER="gcc3"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=pentium4 -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -mfpmath=sse"
CXXFLAGS="-march=pentium4 -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -mfpmath=sse"

Best Regards

-- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:11:14AM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:

> Any clue what is going on?
> Maybe ReiserFS uses the cpu harder?

reiserfs is using more CPU than ext2/ext3. It's maintaining its metadata in
balanced tree. Each tree update often requires shifting of some of the data
between or inside of tree nodes. That's where CPU time is going.


> I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple emerge 
> loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%

Make sure you do not have "CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK" enabled in you kernel config,
as this enables lots of extra checks in reiserfs code that consume even more CPU.

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 09:51, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:11:14AM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > Any clue what is going on?
> > Maybe ReiserFS uses the cpu harder?
>
> reiserfs is using more CPU than ext2/ext3. It's maintaining its metadata in
> balanced tree. Each tree update often requires shifting of some of the data
> between or inside of tree nodes. That's where CPU time is going.

So, you will not suggest me convert my Pentium2 300 Mhz from ext3 to ReiserFS 
will you?
I really wanna try it but I am afraid that the FS will kill my CPU.

> > I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple emerge
> > loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%
>
> Make sure you do not have "CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK" enabled in you kernel
> config, as this enables lots of extra checks in reiserfs code that consume
> even more CPU.

Did not checked this in kernel...will you suggest me try vanilla kernel 
(2.4.20 from kernel.org) without all those patches I have applyed? Maybe this 
will help or not?

Regards
Liviu

> Bye,
>     Oleg

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1AeczD4Ii52ssMRAjViAJ4g4O+dIDJ0GAAED/tU09RWQeDwYACeLaJB
4Jy34dAjEeP4whfw+5rFR/g=
=po/F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> So, you will not suggest me convert my Pentium2 300 Mhz from ext3 to
> ReiserFS will you?
> I really wanna try it but I am afraid that the FS will kill my CPU.

I use reiserfs on a p-mmx 200MHz, and it runs fine. Also when I renice
processes (like kernel compile).

> > > I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple
> > > emerge loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%

Your problem sounds strange. Kan you show a top snapshot before and
after the renice?

Btw, dunno about your os, but for example debian start X with nice level
-10, which makes it a bit more responsive when there are little cpu
cycles left.

> Did not checked this in kernel...will you suggest me try vanilla
> kernel (2.4.20 from kernel.org) without all those patches I have
> applyed? Maybe this will help or not?

Try with or without patches, and show the list your .config settings if
the problem still exists.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:24, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > So, you will not suggest me convert my Pentium2 300 Mhz from ext3 to
> > ReiserFS will you?
> > I really wanna try it but I am afraid that the FS will kill my CPU.
>
> I use reiserfs on a p-mmx 200MHz, and it runs fine. Also when I renice
> processes (like kernel compile).
>
> > > > I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple
> > > > emerge loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%
>
> Your problem sounds strange. Kan you show a top snapshot before and
> after the renice?
>
> Btw, dunno about your os, but for example debian start X with nice level
> -10, which makes it a bit more responsive when there are little cpu
> cycles left.

Now do you understand? I'm even afraid to renice my XFree to -10 cuz I'll 
remain blocked out of the box :-)

>
> > Did not checked this in kernel...will you suggest me try vanilla
> > kernel (2.4.20 from kernel.org) without all those patches I have
> > applyed? Maybe this will help or not?
>
> Try with or without patches, and show the list your .config settings if
> the problem still exists.

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1eTczD4Ii52ssMRAl3SAJ9z55tFVxthXlC+9CI2BmI5qnj1GQCggSIQ
3k8h4rUvQcwgToYfcDnU5rI=
=dIat
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> Now do you understand? I'm even afraid to renice my XFree to -10 cuz
> I'll remain blocked out of the box :-)

Did you actually try?

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:35, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > Now do you understand? I'm even afraid to renice my XFree to -10 cuz
> > I'll remain blocked out of the box :-)
>
> Did you actually try?

Yep

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1h8czD4Ii52ssMRAgyKAKCfSj8P4/RXO/Yjp1mJ/1I1z8Hs6gCfQ8rZ
Qumj22ffO4/qS4vXqFgC/ko=
=E7N+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> On Friday 28 February 2003 14:35, Ookhoi wrote:
> > Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > Now do you understand? I'm even afraid to renice my XFree to -10 cuz
> > > I'll remain blocked out of the box :-)
> >
> > Did you actually try?
> 
> Yep

Ok. Can you provide top output?

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:38, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > On Friday 28 February 2003 14:35, Ookhoi wrote:
> > > Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > > Now do you understand? I'm even afraid to renice my XFree to -10 cuz
> > > > I'll remain blocked out of the box :-)
> > >
> > > Did you actually try?
> >
> > Yep
>
> Ok. Can you provide top output?

Not right now because the computer is 40 minutes far away of me but I can 
connect via ssh and try to install 'mozilla' for example with nice -10 and 
post here the top snapshot
OK?


- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1keczD4Ii52ssMRAouMAJ9edVTo0CY9q0WtEl6H8GfLxf8mEwCfSnfR
ackDgpUBvazSbMm7pzlcog4=
=RgWd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > Ok. Can you provide top output?
> 
> Not right now because the computer is 40 minutes far away of me but I
> can connect via ssh and try to install 'mozilla' for example with nice
> -10 and post here the top snapshot
> OK?

Perfect. Can you also post the output of the following to the list?

cat /proc/cpuinfo
cat /proc/meminfo 
hdparm /dev/hda
dmesg

And top output before, during, and after the install please.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> cat /proc/cpuinfo

$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 15
model           : 1
model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.50GHz
stepping        : 2
cpu MHz         : 1495.561
cache size      : 256 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 2
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca 
cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm
bogomips        : 2949.12

> cat /proc/meminfo

 $  cat /proc/meminfo
        total:    used:    free:  shared: buffers:  cached:
Mem:  262090752 258859008  3231744        0 27267072 122875904
Swap: 526409728   147456 526262272
MemTotal:       255948 kB
MemFree:          3156 kB
MemShared:           0 kB
Buffers:         26628 kB
Cached:         119996 kB
SwapCached:          0 kB
Active:          59220 kB
Inactive:       121724 kB
HighTotal:           0 kB
HighFree:            0 kB
LowTotal:       255948 kB
LowFree:          3156 kB
SwapTotal:      514072 kB
SwapFree:       513928 kB

> hdparm /dev/hda

# hdparm /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 multcount    = 16 (on)
 IO_support   =  1 (32-bit)
 unmaskirq    =  1 (on)
 using_dma    =  1 (on)
 keepsettings =  0 (off)
 readonly     =  0 (off)
 readahead    =  8 (on)
 geometry     = 4865/255/63, sectors = 78165360, start = 0


> dmesg

Linux version 2.4.20-ck3 (root@starshooter.huji.ac.il) (gcc version 3.2.2) #1 
Thu Feb 27 22:09:05 IST 2003
BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009fc00 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 000000000009fc00 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000000ffc0000 (usable)
 BIOS-e820: 000000000ffc0000 - 000000000fff8000 (ACPI data)
 BIOS-e820: 000000000fff8000 - 0000000010000000 (ACPI NVS)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000fec00000 - 00000000fec01000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000fee00000 - 00000000fee01000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000ffb80000 - 00000000ffc00000 (reserved)
 BIOS-e820: 00000000fff00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
255MB LOWMEM available.
ACPI: have wakeup address 0xc0001000
On node 0 totalpages: 65472
zone(0): 4096 pages.
zone(1): 61376 pages.
zone(2): 0 pages.
ACPI: RSDP (v000 AMI                        ) @ 0x000ff980
ACPI: RSDT (v001 D850MV MV85010A 08193.04113) @ 0x0fff0000
ACPI: FADT (v001 D850MV MV85010A 08193.04113) @ 0x0fff1000
ACPI: MADT (v001 D850MV MV85010A 08193.04113) @ 0x0ffe2f45
ACPI: DSDT (v001 D850MV MV85010A 00000.00003) @ 0x00000000
ACPI: BIOS passes blacklist
ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee00000
ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
Processor #0 Unknown CPU [15:1] APIC version 16
ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x01] polarity[0x0] trigger[0x0] lint[0x1])
ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x01] address[0xfec00000] global_irq_base[0x0])
IOAPIC[0]: Assigned apic_id 1
IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 1, version 32, address 0xfec00000, IRQ 0-23
ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus[0] irq[0x9] global_irq[0x9] polarity[0x1] trigger[0x3])
ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus[0] irq[0x0] global_irq[0x2] polarity[0x0] trigger[0x0])
Using ACPI (MADT) for SMP configuration information
Kernel command line: root=/dev/hda2 vga=0x318 hdd=ide-scsi
Initializing CPU#0
Detected 1495.561 MHz processor.
Console: colour dummy device 80x25
Calibrating delay loop... 2949.12 BogoMIPS
Memory: 255780k/261888k available (1822k kernel code, 5720k reserved, 610k 
data, 168k init, 0k highmem)
Dentry cache hash table entries: 32768 (order: 6, 262144 bytes)
Inode cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 5, 131072 bytes)
Mount-cache hash table entries: 4096 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
Buffer-cache hash table entries: 16384 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
Page-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 262144 bytes)
CPU: L1 I cache: 0K, L1 D cache: 8K
CPU: L2 cache: 256K
Intel machine check architecture supported.
Intel machine check reporting enabled on CPU#0.
CPU:     After generic, caps: 3febfbff 00000000 00000000 00000000
CPU:             Common caps: 3febfbff 00000000 00000000 00000000
CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.50GHz stepping 02
Enabling fast FPU save and restore... done.
Enabling unmasked SIMD FPU exception support... done.
Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK.
POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX
enabled ExtINT on CPU#0
ESR value before enabling vector: 00000000
ESR value after enabling vector: 00000000
ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
init IO_APIC IRQs
 IO-APIC (apicid-pin) 1-0, 1-16, 1-17, 1-18, 1-19, 1-20, 1-21, 1-22, 1-23 not 
connected.
..TIMER: vector=0x31 pin1=2 pin2=0
number of MP IRQ sources: 16.
number of IO-APIC #1 registers: 24.
testing the IO APIC.......................

IO APIC #1......
.... register #00: 01000000
.......    : physical APIC id: 01
.... register #01: 00178020
.......     : max redirection entries: 0017
.......     : PRQ implemented: 1
.......     : IO APIC version: 0020
.... register #02: 00000000
.......     : arbitration: 00
.... IRQ redirection table:
 NR Log Phy Mask Trig IRR Pol Stat Dest Deli Vect:   
 00 000 00  1    0    0   0   0    0    0    00
 01 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    39
 02 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    31
 03 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    41
 04 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    49
 05 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    51
 06 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    59
 07 001 01  0    0    0   0   0    1    1    
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1v+czD4Ii52ssMRAl3EAJ0ZQddD4oJM5jp+EUAKMdXh85mbrQCfQI3Q
nGl+j6p45NPiZlST2PTPTi0=
=IFFf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):

[cut cpuinfo, meminfo, hdparm, dmesg]

All looks ok, although your dmesg misses the last half.

Can you try latest 2.4 without patches?
If you still have problems, please post your kernel config.

Also, please post a 'time make bzImage' so we can compare that.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:00, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
>
> [cut cpuinfo, meminfo, hdparm, dmesg]
>
> All looks ok, although your dmesg misses the last half.

attached in second email

> Can you try latest 2.4 without patches?

yes

> If you still have problems, please post your kernel config.
>
> Also, please post a 'time make bzImage' so we can compare that.

Don't get mw wrong :-)
Compilation goes VERY FAST, but i'll post the time output

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X15JczD4Ii52ssMRAmhLAJ0Rn6owky80iMi6wYsuZTmra76b6QCffXNs
GITMLqEW7sx8yroZzbPUqPc=
=RxMY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This is my .config file of the kernel 2.4.20..,maybe you can find some wrong 
in here..........
Regards


#
# Automatically generated by make menuconfig: don't edit
#
CONFIG_X86=y
# CONFIG_SBUS is not set
CONFIG_UID16=y

#
# Code maturity level options
#
CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=y

#
# Loadable module support
#
CONFIG_MODULES=y
CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y
CONFIG_KMOD=y

#
# Processor type and features
#
CONFIG_LOLAT=y
CONFIG_LOLAT_SYSCTL=y
# CONFIG_M386 is not set
# CONFIG_M486 is not set
# CONFIG_M586 is not set
# CONFIG_M586TSC is not set
# CONFIG_M586MMX is not set
# CONFIG_M586MMX31 is not set
# CONFIG_M686 is not set
# CONFIG_M68631 is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII31 is not set
# CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
CONFIG_MPENTIUM431=y
# CONFIG_MK6 is not set
# CONFIG_MK6231 is not set
# CONFIG_MK7 is not set
# CONFIG_MK731 is not set
# CONFIG_MXP31 is not set
# CONFIG_MMP31 is not set
# CONFIG_MELAN is not set
# CONFIG_MCRUSOE is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIPC6 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP2 is not set
# CONFIG_MWINCHIP3D is not set
# CONFIG_MCYRIXIII is not set
CONFIG_X86_WP_WORKS_OK=y
CONFIG_X86_INVLPG=y
CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG=y
CONFIG_X86_XADD=y
CONFIG_X86_BSWAP=y
CONFIG_X86_POPAD_OK=y
# CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK is not set
CONFIG_RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM=y
CONFIG_X86_L1_CACHE_SHIFT=7
CONFIG_X86_HAS_TSC=y
CONFIG_X86_GOOD_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_PGE=y
CONFIG_X86_USE_PPRO_CHECKSUM=y
CONFIG_X86_MCE=y
# CONFIG_TOSHIBA is not set
# CONFIG_I8K is not set
# CONFIG_MICROCODE is not set
# CONFIG_X86_MSR is not set
# CONFIG_X86_CPUID is not set
CONFIG_NOHIGHMEM=y
# CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G is not set
# CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G is not set
# CONFIG_HIGHMEM is not set
# CONFIG_MATH_EMULATION is not set
CONFIG_MTRR=y
# CONFIG_SMP is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
CONFIG_X86_UP_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_UP_IOAPIC=y
CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC=y
CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC=y
# CONFIG_X86_TSC_DISABLE is not set
CONFIG_X86_TSC=y

#
# General setup
#
CONFIG_NET=y
CONFIG_PCI=y
# CONFIG_PCI_GOBIOS is not set
# CONFIG_PCI_GODIRECT is not set
CONFIG_PCI_GOANY=y
CONFIG_PCI_BIOS=y
CONFIG_PCI_DIRECT=y
CONFIG_ISA=y
CONFIG_PCI_NAMES=y
# CONFIG_EISA is not set
# CONFIG_MCA is not set
CONFIG_HOTPLUG=y

#
# PCMCIA/CardBus support
#
# CONFIG_PCMCIA is not set

#
# PCI Hotplug Support
#
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI is not set
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_COMPAQ is not set
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_COMPAQ_NVRAM is not set
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_IBM is not set
# CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI is not set
CONFIG_SYSVIPC=y
CONFIG_BSD_PROCESS_ACCT=y
CONFIG_SYSCTL=y
CONFIG_KCORE_ELF=y
# CONFIG_KCORE_AOUT is not set
CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT=y
CONFIG_BINFMT_ELF=y
CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC=y
CONFIG_PM=y
# CONFIG_APM is not set

#
# ACPI Support
#
CONFIG_ACPI=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BOOT=y
CONFIG_ACPI_BUS=y
CONFIG_ACPI_INTERPRETER=y
CONFIG_ACPI_EC=y
CONFIG_ACPI_POWER=y
CONFIG_ACPI_PCI=y
CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
CONFIG_ACPI_SYSTEM=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_AC is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY is not set
CONFIG_ACPI_BUTTON=y
CONFIG_ACPI_FAN=y
CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR=y
# CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_TOSHIBA is not set
# CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG is not set

#
# Memory Technology Devices (MTD)
#
# CONFIG_MTD is not set

#
# Parallel port support
#
CONFIG_PARPORT=m
CONFIG_PARPORT_PC=m
CONFIG_PARPORT_PC_CML1=m
# CONFIG_PARPORT_SERIAL is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_PC_FIFO is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_PC_SUPERIO is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_AMIGA is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_MFC3 is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_ATARI is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_GSC is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_SUNBPP is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_OTHER is not set
# CONFIG_PARPORT_1284 is not set

#
# Plug and Play configuration
#
CONFIG_PNP=y
CONFIG_ISAPNP=y

#
# Block devices
#
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_FD=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_XD is not set
# CONFIG_PARIDE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_DA is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_CPQ_CISS_DA is not set
# CONFIG_CISS_SCSI_TAPE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DAC960 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UMEM is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP=m
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_NBD is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM=m
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_SIZE=4096
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_STATS is not set

#
# Multi-device support (RAID and LVM)
#
# CONFIG_MD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_MD is not set
# CONFIG_MD_LINEAR is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID0 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID1 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_RAID5 is not set
# CONFIG_MD_MULTIPATH is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LVM is not set

#
# Networking options
#
CONFIG_PACKET=y
# CONFIG_PACKET_MMAP is not set
# CONFIG_NETLINK_DEV is not set
# CONFIG_NETFILTER is not set
# CONFIG_FILTER is not set
CONFIG_UNIX=y
CONFIG_INET=y
CONFIG_IP_MULTICAST=y
# CONFIG_IP_ADVANCED_ROUTER is not set
# CONFIG_IP_PNP is not set
CONFIG_NET_IPIP=y
# CONFIG_NET_IPGRE is not set
# CONFIG_IP_MROUTE is not set
# CONFIG_ARPD is not set
# CONFIG_INET_ECN is not set
# CONFIG_SYN_COOKIES is not set
CONFIG_IPV6=m
# CONFIG_KHTTPD is not set
# CONFIG_ATM is not set
# CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q is not set
CONFIG_IPX=y
CONFIG_IPX_INTERN=y
# CONFIG_ATALK is not set

#
# Appletalk devices
#
# CONFIG_DEV_APPLETALK is not set
# CONFIG_DECNET is not set
# CONFIG_BRIDGE is not set
# CONFIG_X25 is not set
# CONFIG_LAPB is not set
# CONFIG_LLC is not set
# CONFIG_NET_DIVERT is not set
# CONFIG_ECONET is not set
# CONFIG_WAN_ROUTER is not set
# CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE is not set
# CONFIG_NET_HW_FLOWCONTROL is not set

#
# QoS and/or fair queueing
#
# CONFIG_NET_SCHED is not set

#
# Network testing
#
# CONFIG_NET_PKTGEN is not set

#
# Telephony Support
#
# CONFIG_PHONE is not set
# CONFIG_PHONE_IXJ is not set
# CONFIG_PHONE_IXJ_PCMCIA is not set

#
# ATA/IDE/MFM/RLL support
#
CONFIG_IDE=y

#
# IDE, ATA and ATAPI Block devices
#
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD_IDE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y
# CONFIG_IDEDISK_STROKE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_VENDOR is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_FUJITSU is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_IBM is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_MAXTOR is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_QUANTUM is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_SEAGATE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK_WD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_COMMERIAL is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_TIVO is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDECS is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDECD=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDETAPE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEFLOPPY is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDESCSI=m
# CONFIG_IDE_TASK_IOCTL is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD640=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD640_ENHANCED is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ISAPNP is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RZ1000=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEPCI=y
CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_PCI=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_OFFBOARD is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_FORCED is not set
CONFIG_IDEDMA_PCI_AUTO=y
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_ONLYDISK is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA=y
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_PCI_WIP is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_TIMEOUT is not set
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_NEW_DRIVE_LISTINGS is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ADMA=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_AEC62XX is not set
# CONFIG_AEC62XX_TUNING is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ALI15X3 is not set
# CONFIG_WDC_ALI15X3 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_AMD74XX is not set
# CONFIG_AMD74XX_OVERRIDE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD64X is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CMD680 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CY82C693 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_CS5530 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HPT34X is not set
# CONFIG_HPT34X_AUTODMA is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HPT366 is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PIIX=y
CONFIG_PIIX_TUNING=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_NS87415 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_OPTI621 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PDC202XX is not set
# CONFIG_PDC202XX_BURST is not set
# CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SVWKS is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SIS5513 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SLC90E66 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_TRM290 is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_VIA82CXXX is not set
# CONFIG_IDE_CHIPSETS is not set
CONFIG_IDEDMA_AUTO=y
# CONFIG_IDEDMA_IVB is not set
# CONFIG_DMA_NONPCI is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_MODES=y
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ATARAID is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ATARAID_PDC is not set
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ATARAID_HPT is not set

#
# SCSI support
#
CONFIG_SCSI=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y
CONFIG_SD_EXTRA_DEVS=40
# CONFIG_CHR_DEV_ST is not set
# CONFIG_CHR_DEV_OSST is not set
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=m
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR is not set
CONFIG_SR_EXTRA_DEVS=2
CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SG=m
CONFIG_SCSI_DEBUG_QUEUES=y
CONFIG_SCSI_MULTI_LUN=y
CONFIG_SCSI_CONSTANTS=y
# CONFIG_SCSI_LOGGING is not set

#
# SCSI low-level drivers
#
# CONFIG_BLK_DEV_3W_XXXX_RAID is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_7000FASST is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_ACARD is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AHA152X is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AHA1542 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AHA1740 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AACRAID is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AIC7XXX is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AIC7XXX_OLD is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_DPT_I2O is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_ADVANSYS is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_IN2000 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_AM53C974 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_MEGARAID is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_BUSLOGIC is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_CPQFCTS is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_DMX3191D is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_DTC3280 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_EATA is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_EATA_DMA is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_EATA_PIO is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_FUTURE_DOMAIN is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_GDTH is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_GENERIC_NCR5380 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_IPS is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_INITIO is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_INIA100 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_PPA is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_IMM is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C406A is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C7xx is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_SYM53C8XX_2 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX is not set
CONFIG_SCSI_SYM53C8XX=y
CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_DEFAULT_TAGS=4
CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_MAX_TAGS=32
CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_SYNC=20
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_PROFILE is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_IOMAPPED is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_PQS_PDS is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_NCR53C8XX_SYMBIOS_COMPAT is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_PAS16 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_PCI2000 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_PCI2220I is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_PSI240I is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_FAS is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_ISP is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_FC is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_1280 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_SEAGATE is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_SIM710 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_SYM53C416 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_DC390T is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_T128 is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_U14_34F is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_ULTRASTOR is not set
# CONFIG_SCSI_DEBUG is not set

#
# Fusion MPT device support
#
# CONFIG_FUSION is not set
# CONFIG_FUSION_BOOT is not set
# CONFIG_FUSION_ISENSE is not set
# CONFIG_FUSION_CTL is not set
# CONFIG_FUSION_LAN is not set

#
# IEEE 1394 (FireWire) support (EXPERIMENTAL)
#
# CONFIG_IEEE1394 is not set

#
# I2O device support
#
# CONFIG_I2O is not set
# CONFIG_I2O_PCI is not set
# CONFIG_I2O_BLOCK is not set
# CONFIG_I2O_LAN is not set
# CONFIG_I2O_SCSI is not set
# CONFIG_I2O_PROC is not set

#
# Network device support
#
CONFIG_NETDEVICES=y

#
# ARCnet devices
#
# CONFIG_ARCNET is not set
# CONFIG_DUMMY is not set
# CONFIG_BONDING is not set
# CONFIG_EQUALIZER is not set
# CONFIG_TUN is not set
# CONFIG_ETHERTAP is not set
# CONFIG_NET_SB1000 is not set

#
# Ethernet (10 or 100Mbit)
#
CONFIG_NET_ETHERNET=y
# CONFIG_SUNLANCE is not set
# CONFIG_HAPPYMEAL is not set
# CONFIG_SUNBMAC is not set
# CONFIG_SUNQE is not set
# CONFIG_SUNGEM is not set
# CONFIG_NET_VENDOR_3COM is not set
# CONFIG_LANCE is not set
# CONFIG_NET_VENDOR_SMC is not set
# CONFIG_NET_VENDOR_RACAL is not set
# CONFIG_AT1700 is not set
# CONFIG_DEPCA is not set
# CONFIG_HP100 is not set
# CONFIG_NET_ISA is not set
CONFIG_NET_PCI=y
# CONFIG_PCNET32 is not set
# CONFIG_ADAPTEC_STARFIRE is not set
# CONFIG_AC3200 is not set
# CONFIG_APRICOT is not set
# CONFIG_CS89x0 is not set
# CONFIG_TULIP is not set
# CONFIG_DE4X5 is not set
# CONFIG_DGRS is not set
# CONFIG_DM9102 is not set
CONFIG_EEPRO100=m
# CONFIG_E100 is not set
# CONFIG_LNE390 is not set
# CONFIG_FEALNX is not set
# CONFIG_NATSEMI is not set
# CONFIG_NE2K_PCI is not set
# CONFIG_NE3210 is not set
# CONFIG_ES3210 is not set
# CONFIG_8139CP is not set
# CONFIG_8139TOO is not set
# CONFIG_8139TOO_PIO is not set
# CONFIG_8139TOO_TUNE_TWISTER is not set
# CONFIG_8139TOO_8129 is not set
# CONFIG_8139_OLD_RX_RESET is not set
# CONFIG_SIS900 is not set
# CONFIG_EPIC100 is not set
# CONFIG_SUNDANCE is not set
# CONFIG_SUNDANCE_MMIO is not set
# CONFIG_TLAN is not set
# CONFIG_TC35815 is not set
# CONFIG_VIA_RHINE is not set
# CONFIG_VIA_RHINE_MMIO is not set
# CONFIG_WINBOND_840 is not set
# CONFIG_NET_POCKET is not set

#
# Ethernet (1000 Mbit)
#
# CONFIG_ACENIC is not set
# CONFIG_DL2K is not set
# CONFIG_E1000 is not set
# CONFIG_MYRI_SBUS is not set
# CONFIG_NS83820 is not set
# CONFIG_HAMACHI is not set
# CONFIG_YELLOWFIN is not set
# CONFIG_SK98LIN is not set
# CONFIG_TIGON3 is not set
# CONFIG_FDDI is not set
# CONFIG_HIPPI is not set
# CONFIG_PLIP is not set
# CONFIG_PPP is not set
# CONFIG_SLIP is not set

#
# Wireless LAN (non-hamradio)
#
# CONFIG_NET_RADIO is not set

#
# Token Ring devices
#
# CONFIG_TR is not set
# CONFIG_NET_FC is not set
# CONFIG_RCPCI is not set
# CONFIG_SHAPER is not set

#
# Wan interfaces
#
# CONFIG_WAN is not set

#
# Amateur Radio support
#
# CONFIG_HAMRADIO is not set

#
# IrDA (infrared) support
#
# CONFIG_IRDA is not set

#
# ISDN subsystem
#
# CONFIG_ISDN is not set

#
# Old CD-ROM drivers (not SCSI, not IDE)
#
# CONFIG_CD_NO_IDESCSI is not set

#
# Input core support
#
# CONFIG_INPUT is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_KEYBDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_MOUSEDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_JOYDEV is not set
# CONFIG_INPUT_EVDEV is not set

#
# Character devices
#
CONFIG_VT=y
CONFIG_VT_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_SERIAL=y
# CONFIG_SERIAL_CONSOLE is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_EXTENDED is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_NONSTANDARD is not set
CONFIG_UNIX98_PTYS=y
CONFIG_UNIX98_PTY_COUNT=256
CONFIG_PRINTER=m
# CONFIG_LP_CONSOLE is not set
# CONFIG_PPDEV is not set

#
# I2C support
#
# CONFIG_I2C is not set

#
# Mice
#
# CONFIG_BUSMOUSE is not set
CONFIG_MOUSE=y
CONFIG_PSMOUSE=y
# CONFIG_82C710_MOUSE is not set
# CONFIG_PC110_PAD is not set
# CONFIG_MK712_MOUSE is not set

#
# Joysticks
#
# CONFIG_INPUT_GAMEPORT is not set
# CONFIG_QIC02_TAPE is not set

#
# Watchdog Cards
#
# CONFIG_WATCHDOG is not set
# CONFIG_AMD_RNG is not set
# CONFIG_INTEL_RNG is not set
# CONFIG_AMD_PM768 is not set
# CONFIG_NVRAM is not set
# CONFIG_RTC is not set
# CONFIG_DTLK is not set
# CONFIG_R3964 is not set
# CONFIG_APPLICOM is not set
# CONFIG_SONYPI is not set

#
# Ftape, the floppy tape device driver
#
# CONFIG_FTAPE is not set
CONFIG_AGP=y
CONFIG_AGP_INTEL=y
CONFIG_AGP_I810=y
# CONFIG_AGP_VIA is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_AMD is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_AMD_8151 is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_SIS is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_ALI is not set
# CONFIG_AGP_SWORKS is not set
CONFIG_DRM=y
# CONFIG_DRM_OLD is not set
CONFIG_DRM_NEW=y
# CONFIG_DRM_TDFX is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_R128 is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_RADEON is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_I810 is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_I810_XFREE_41 is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_I830 is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_MGA is not set
# CONFIG_DRM_SIS is not set
# CONFIG_MWAVE is not set

#
# Multimedia devices
#
# CONFIG_VIDEO_DEV is not set

#
# File systems
#
# CONFIG_QUOTA is not set
# CONFIG_AUTOFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS=y
CONFIG_REISERFS_FS=y
# CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK is not set
# CONFIG_REISERFS_PROC_INFO is not set
# CONFIG_SUPERMOUNT is not set
# CONFIG_ADFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_ADFS_FS_RW is not set
# CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_BEFS_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_BFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_EXT3_FS=m
CONFIG_JBD=m
# CONFIG_JBD_DEBUG is not set
CONFIG_FAT_FS=m
# CONFIG_MSDOS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UMSDOS_FS is not set
CONFIG_VFAT_FS=m
# CONFIG_EFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_JFFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_JFFS2_FS is not set
# CONFIG_CRAMFS is not set
CONFIG_TMPFS=y
CONFIG_RAMFS=y
CONFIG_ISO9660_FS=y
CONFIG_JOLIET=y
CONFIG_ZISOFS=y
# CONFIG_JFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_JFS_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_JFS_STATISTICS is not set
# CONFIG_MINIX_FS is not set
# CONFIG_VXFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_NTFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_NTFS_RW is not set
# CONFIG_HPFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_PROC_FS=y
CONFIG_DEVFS_FS=y
CONFIG_DEVFS_MOUNT=y
# CONFIG_DEVFS_DEBUG is not set
CONFIG_DEVPTS_FS=y
# CONFIG_QNX4FS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_QNX4FS_RW is not set
# CONFIG_ROMFS_FS is not set
CONFIG_EXT2_FS=m
# CONFIG_SYSV_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UDF_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UDF_RW is not set
# CONFIG_UFS_FS is not set
# CONFIG_UFS_FS_WRITE is not set

#
# Network File Systems
#
CONFIG_CODA_FS=y
# CONFIG_INTERMEZZO_FS is not set
CONFIG_NFS_FS=m
CONFIG_NFS_V3=y
# CONFIG_ROOT_NFS is not set
CONFIG_NFSD=y
CONFIG_NFSD_V3=y
CONFIG_NFSD_TCP=y
CONFIG_SUNRPC=y
CONFIG_LOCKD=y
CONFIG_LOCKD_V4=y
CONFIG_SMB_FS=y
CONFIG_SMB_NLS_DEFAULT=y
CONFIG_SMB_NLS_REMOTE="cp437"
CONFIG_NCP_FS=m
CONFIG_NCPFS_PACKET_SIGNING=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_IOCTL_LOCKING=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_STRONG=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_NFS_NS=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_OS2_NS=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_SMALLDOS=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_NLS=y
CONFIG_NCPFS_EXTRAS=y
CONFIG_ZISOFS_FS=y

#
# Partition Types
#
# CONFIG_PARTITION_ADVANCED is not set
CONFIG_MSDOS_PARTITION=y
CONFIG_SMB_NLS=y
CONFIG_NLS=y

#
# Native Language Support
#
CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT="iso8859-1"
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_437 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_737 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_775 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_850=y
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_852=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_855 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_857 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_860 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_861 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_862=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_863 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_864 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_865 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_866 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_869 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_936 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_950 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_932 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_949 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_874 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_8=y
CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_1250=y
# CONFIG_NLS_CODEPAGE_1251 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_1=y
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_2=y
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_3 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_4 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_5 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_6 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_7 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_9 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_13 is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_14 is not set
CONFIG_NLS_ISO8859_15=y
# CONFIG_NLS_KOI8_R is not set
# CONFIG_NLS_KOI8_U is not set
CONFIG_NLS_UTF8=y

#
# Console drivers
#
CONFIG_VGA_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y
# CONFIG_MDA_CONSOLE is not set

#
# Frame-buffer support
#
CONFIG_FB=y
CONFIG_DUMMY_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_FB_RIVA is not set
# CONFIG_FB_CLGEN is not set
# CONFIG_FB_PM2 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_PM3 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_CYBER2000 is not set
CONFIG_FB_VESA=y
# CONFIG_FB_VGA16 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_HGA is not set
CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y
# CONFIG_FB_MATROX is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ATY is not set
# CONFIG_FB_RADEON is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ATY128 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_SIS is not set
# CONFIG_FB_NEOMAGIC is not set
# CONFIG_FB_3DFX is not set
# CONFIG_FB_VOODOO1 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_TRIDENT is not set
# CONFIG_FB_VIRTUAL is not set
CONFIG_FBCON_ADVANCED=y
# CONFIG_FBCON_MFB is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_CFB2 is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_CFB4 is not set
CONFIG_FBCON_CFB8=y
CONFIG_FBCON_CFB16=y
CONFIG_FBCON_CFB24=y
CONFIG_FBCON_CFB32=y
# CONFIG_FBCON_AFB is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_ILBM is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_IPLAN2P2 is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_IPLAN2P4 is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_IPLAN2P8 is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_MAC is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_VGA_PLANES is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_VGA is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_HGA is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_FONTWIDTH8_ONLY is not set
# CONFIG_FBCON_FONTS is not set
CONFIG_FONT_8x8=y
CONFIG_FONT_8x16=y

#
# Sound
#
CONFIG_SOUND=m
# CONFIG_SOUND_ALI5455 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_BT878 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_CMPCI is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_EMU10K1 is not set
# CONFIG_MIDI_EMU10K1 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_FUSION is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_CS4281 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_ES1370 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_ES1371 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_ESSSOLO1 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_MAESTRO is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_MAESTRO3 is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_FORTE is not set
CONFIG_SOUND_ICH=y
# CONFIG_SOUND_RME96XX is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_SONICVIBES is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_TRIDENT is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_MSNDCLAS is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_MSNDPIN is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_VIA82CXXX is not set
# CONFIG_MIDI_VIA82CXXX is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_OSS is not set
# CONFIG_SOUND_TVMIXER is not set

#
# USB support
#
# CONFIG_USB is not set

#
# Bluetooth support
#
# CONFIG_BLUEZ is not set

#
# Kernel hacking
#
# CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL is not set

#
# Library routines
#
CONFIG_ZLIB_INFLATE=y
# CONFIG_ZLIB_DEFLATE is not set
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2CMczD4Ii52ssMRAo1IAKCIzz6PSLABHtx7VkzJyuUluTAQjgCgkvKr
1o+xT/V2HbywsBX/XZDIlwo=
=wbKQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> This is my .config file of the kernel 2.4.20..,maybe you can find some
> wrong in here..........

> # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
> # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII31 is not set
> # CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
> CONFIG_MPENTIUM431=y

What cpu is this? This is not in a 2.4.20 kernel. Are you sure this is
the right .config?
You should use CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 I think.

> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
> CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y

Why this one?

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:26, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > This is my .config file of the kernel 2.4.20..,maybe you can find some
> > wrong in here..........
> >
> > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
> > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII31 is not set
> > # CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
> > CONFIG_MPENTIUM431=y
>
> What cpu is this? This is not in a 2.4.20 kernel. Are you sure this is
> the right .config?
> You should use CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 I think.
i have applyed 13_gcc31-compile-optimizations patch
(this gives me specific march for the cpu i want)

+ifdef CONFIG_MPENTIUM431
+CFLAGS += -march=pentium4 -mmmx -msse -msse2 -falign-functions=4 
- -fprefetch-loop-arrays -maccumulate-outgoing-args
+endif

see?

>
> > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
> > CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y
>
> Why this one?

well, not sure about these...these are my patches........

# ls
001_o1_pe_ll_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2  
005_supermount_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2  
010_tune_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
002_aavm_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2      007_acpi_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2        
011_vt_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
003_rl2_021215_ck.2.4.20.patch.bz2       008_vh_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2          

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2UOczD4Ii52ssMRAmolAKCDBHB0EL4yipCScPDsbk3/ng61UwCeJlkr
l3+4w+RN/DCJmkYR932C334=
=XjI4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > This is my .config file of the kernel 2.4.20..,maybe you can find some
> > > wrong in here..........
> > >
> > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
> > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII31 is not set
> > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
> > > CONFIG_MPENTIUM431=y
> >
> > What cpu is this? This is not in a 2.4.20 kernel. Are you sure this is
> > the right .config?
> > You should use CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 I think.
>
> i have applyed 13_gcc31-compile-optimizations patch
> (this gives me specific march for the cpu i want)
> 
> +ifdef CONFIG_MPENTIUM431
> +CFLAGS += -march=pentium4 -mmmx -msse -msse2 -falign-functions=4 
> - -fprefetch-loop-arrays -maccumulate-outgoing-args
> +endif
> 
> see?

Jup, ok.

> > > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
> > > CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y
> >
> > Why this one?
> 
> well, not sure about these...these are my patches........
> 
> # ls
> 001_o1_pe_ll_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2  
> 005_supermount_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2  
> 010_tune_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> 002_aavm_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2      007_acpi_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2        
> 011_vt_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> 003_rl2_021215_ck.2.4.20.patch.bz2       008_vh_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2          

Ok, now please try again with the latest 2.4.21-preX

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:33, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > > This is my .config file of the kernel 2.4.20..,maybe you can find
> > > > some wrong in here..........
> > > >
> > > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII is not set
> > > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII31 is not set
> > > > # CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 is not set
> > > > CONFIG_MPENTIUM431=y
> > >
> > > What cpu is this? This is not in a 2.4.20 kernel. Are you sure this is
> > > the right .config?
> > > You should use CONFIG_MPENTIUM4 I think.
> >
> > i have applyed 13_gcc31-compile-optimizations patch
> > (this gives me specific march for the cpu i want)
> >
> > +ifdef CONFIG_MPENTIUM431
> > +CFLAGS += -march=pentium4 -mmmx -msse -msse2 -falign-functions=4
> > - -fprefetch-loop-arrays -maccumulate-outgoing-args
> > +endif
> >
> > see?
>
> Jup, ok.
>
> > > > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDISK=y
> > > > CONFIG_IDEDISK_MULTI_MODE=y
> > >
> > > Why this one?
> >
> > well, not sure about these...these are my patches........
> >
> > # ls
> > 001_o1_pe_ll_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> > 005_supermount_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> > 010_tune_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> > 002_aavm_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2     
> > 007_acpi_021215_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2 011_vt_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
> > 003_rl2_021215_ck.2.4.20.patch.bz2      
> > 008_vh_021217_ck_2.4.20.patch.bz2
>
> Ok, now please try again with the latest 2.4.21-preX

kernel.org sais:
[quote]
Prepatches may be poorly tested, and may in fact not work at all. Use on your 
own risk;
[/quote]

Do you think this kernel will boot? The computer is 45 minutes far away from 
my location is it will not be nice :-)
- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2gBczD4Ii52ssMRApdJAJ9In9i5CL7kqu02zHzOqW3w05WJVQCeP2dK
/KRW/OCtUmA0AHq8xSAnvM0=
=A0iL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > Ok, now please try again with the latest 2.4.21-preX
> 
> kernel.org sais:
> [quote]
> Prepatches may be poorly tested, and may in fact not work at all. Use
> on your 
> own risk;
> [/quote]
> 
> Do you think this kernel will boot? The computer is 45 minutes far
> away from my location is it will not be nice :-)

I think yes, but can't say for sure, and don't count on what strangers
tell you. Besides, 45 minutes sounds like a perfect bike trip. ;-)

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:48, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > Ok, now please try again with the latest 2.4.21-preX
> >
> > kernel.org sais:
> > [quote]
> > Prepatches may be poorly tested, and may in fact not work at all. Use
> > on your
> > own risk;
> > [/quote]
> >
> > Do you think this kernel will boot? The computer is 45 minutes far
> > away from my location is it will not be nice :-)
>
> I think yes, but can't say for sure, and don't count on what strangers
> tell you. Besides, 45 minutes sounds like a perfect bike trip. ;-)

Naaaaaaaah :-)
If you haven't seen yet the news, we had snow in Jerusalem so it's cold and 
wet :p

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2mKczD4Ii52ssMRAryiAJ0Sc4S6EqadDLALbw2opbDYMu3ylgCeMQeH
2U2+gI7k+pZzMd2QfBRW15Q=
=qzAS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:52:10PM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > > Do you think this kernel will boot? The computer is 45 minutes far
> > > away from my location is it will not be nice :-)
> > I think yes, but can't say for sure, and don't count on what strangers
> > tell you. Besides, 45 minutes sounds like a perfect bike trip. ;-)
> Naaaaaaaah :-)
> If you haven't seen yet the news, we had snow in Jerusalem so it's cold and 
> wet :p

Anyway this is very strange.
Perhaps you may want to dig "low latency" patches and give them a try.

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 16:02, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:52:10PM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > > > Do you think this kernel will boot? The computer is 45 minutes far
> > > > away from my location is it will not be nice :-)
> > >
> > > I think yes, but can't say for sure, and don't count on what strangers
> > > tell you. Besides, 45 minutes sounds like a perfect bike trip. ;-)
> >
> > Naaaaaaaah :-)
> > If you haven't seen yet the news, we had snow in Jerusalem so it's cold
> > and wet :p
>
> Anyway this is very strange.
> Perhaps you may want to dig "low latency" patches and give them a try.

Already have it:

[*] Low latency scheduling
 [*] Control low latency with sysctl

> Bye,
>     Oleg

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X21HczD4Ii52ssMRAmaUAJ0TpD1Vv7Ho3MnsjY7uc+bE4opeywCffNXM
6JZie8+mZrLlGU172DBa+jU=
=RGLE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the "top" 
command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and another 
10 antill I saw the output...really slow )

35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1% idle
Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
        59512k active,             119096k inactive
Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k 
cached

  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
  889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
  890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
  845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
    1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
    2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
    3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
    4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
    5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
    6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
    9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kreiserfsd
   33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00 devfsd
 3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00 metalog
 3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 metalog
 3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 sshd
 3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
 3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
 3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
 3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
 3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
 3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 screen
12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee
31577 liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash
  300 portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
  699 portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
  700 portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh
  701 portage    6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make
  886 portage    6 -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
=uWh1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Hans Reiser]

Voicu Liviu wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the "top" 
>command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and another 
>10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
>
>35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
>CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1% idle
>Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
>        59512k active,             119096k inactive
>Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k 
>cached
>
>  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>  889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
>  890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
>  845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>    1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
>    2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
>    3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
>    4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
>    5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
>    6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
>    9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kreiserfsd
>   33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00 devfsd
> 3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00 metalog
> 3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 metalog
> 3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 sshd
> 3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 screen
>12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
>12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
>31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
>31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
>31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee
>31577 liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash
>  300 portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>  699 portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>  700 portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh
>  701 portage    6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make
>  886 portage    6 -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
>O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
>=uWh1
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
>  
>
Voicu, I think you have your nice directions confused, and you want to 
nice your compile to +10 not -10.  Probably Unix should reverse the 
directions, but....

-- 
Hans

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Hans Reiser wrote (ao):
> > PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> > 889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> > 890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> > 845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>
> Voicu, I think you have your nice directions confused, and you want to
> nice your compile to +10 not -10.  Probably Unix should reverse the
> directions, but....

I believe he wants to speed up the compile, for which -10 is ok if there
are other processes which need cpu cycles.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:57, Ookhoi wrote:
> Hans Reiser wrote (ao):
> > > PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> > > 889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> > > 890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> > > 845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
> >
> > Voicu, I think you have your nice directions confused, and you want to
> > nice your compile to +10 not -10.  Probably Unix should reverse the
> > directions, but....
>
> I believe he wants to speed up the compile, for which -10 is ok if there
> are other processes which need cpu cycles.

Corect, I use X and vmware and JBuilder and XFCE4 so I can renice each 1 I 
want....

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X123czD4Ii52ssMRAt2MAKCn1qh5LLUxz59BlGXkvg/zgHPuhwCeIwv7
fMUxjNFLbyFxNa3oA5B4Gt0=
=zzZA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Manuel Krause]

On 02/28/2003 02:01 PM, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Friday 28 February 2003 14:57, Ookhoi wrote:
> 
>>Hans Reiser wrote (ao):
>>
>>>>PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>>>>889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
>>>>890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
>>>>845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>>>
>>>Voicu, I think you have your nice directions confused, and you want to
>>>nice your compile to +10 not -10.  Probably Unix should reverse the
>>>directions, but....
>>
>>I believe he wants to speed up the compile, for which -10 is ok if there
>>are other processes which need cpu cycles.
> 
> 
> Corect, I use X and vmware and JBuilder and XFCE4 so I can renice each 1 I 
> want....

When using that setup _including VMware_ you simply should not renice 
"each process you want".

Especially VMware (What version?!) remains on disk, transfers from & to 
disk /tmp/ram0 (e.g) and consumes much of CPU-time what is very complex 
to control via nice (in relation to other processes).

Just my experience, best regards,

Manuel

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the "top" 
> command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and another 
> 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> 
> 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1% idle
> Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
>         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k 
> cached
> 
>   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
>   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
>   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init

In your case, there is no reason to renice the compile to -10, as there
are no other processes which take cpu, and therefore there is nothing to
gain.

I still wonder what could be the reason for the bad response of the
keyboard.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:56, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the
> > "top" command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and
> > another 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> >
> > 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1%
> > idle Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,  
> > 28344k buff 59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k
> > cached
> >
> >   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> >   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> >   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> >   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
> >     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
>
> In your case, there is no reason to renice the compile to -10, as there
> are no other processes which take cpu, and therefore there is nothing to
> gain.

This is CORRECT, but think, could I use XFree while some preccese has nice 
value -10? I don't think so

> I still wonder what could be the reason for the bad response of the
> keyboard.

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X111czD4Ii52ssMRAswZAJ9eOFo60Z5Jq+h3I6UsFqFFw9KLXACaA75y
Z3ptPsNmKnQW4hJ6lT0ee50=
=s/rV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > In your case, there is no reason to renice the compile to -10, as
> > there are no other processes which take cpu, and therefore there is
> > nothing to gain.
> 
> This is CORRECT, but think, could I use XFree while some preccese has
> nice value -10? I don't think so

You should be able to. But is your X also -10 ?
You said you had problem with that too, but that is really weird as X
would not want 100% cpu.

In an other mail you write that your compiles are very fast. If a new
kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast anyway, I
would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or renice to -5 or
some value which does not bother you.

I'm quite sure this is not reiserfs related in any way. Just convert
your p300 to reiserfs and see what happens.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:06, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > In your case, there is no reason to renice the compile to -10, as
> > > there are no other processes which take cpu, and therefore there is
> > > nothing to gain.
> >
> > This is CORRECT, but think, could I use XFree while some preccese has
> > nice value -10? I don't think so
>
> You should be able to. But is your X also -10 ?

now X is not running....only console

> You said you had problem with that too, but that is really weird as X
> would not want 100% cpu.
>
> In an other mail you write that your compiles are very fast. If a new
> kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast anyway, I
> would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or renice to -5 or
> some value which does not bother you.

I don't want to renice compilation threads, only X to get more responsives 
from it...but this locks me out :-)

> I'm quite sure this is not reiserfs related in any way. Just convert
> your p300 to reiserfs and see what happens.

maybe........

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2AcczD4Ii52ssMRAgv7AKCkEbQnPTj2X7a3IMtrjYFgNqTmlQCghvM6
8RbbRK+Z4QZAS1ZWv8BRSmw=
=2KLA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast
> > anyway, I would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or
> > renice to -5 or some value which does not bother you.
> 
> I don't want to renice compilation threads, only X to get more
> responsives from it...but this locks me out :-)

So you say, if your box is idle, and you renice your X to -10, you can't
use X? And your input on the prompt is still very slow?

That would be very weird.

I asked you to take the latest 2.4 without patches, but please try the
latest 2.4 with the latest -pre patch. I'm curious to what that one will
bring.

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:13, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast
> > > anyway, I would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or
> > > renice to -5 or some value which does not bother you.
> >
> > I don't want to renice compilation threads, only X to get more
> > responsives from it...but this locks me out :-)
>
> So you say, if your box is idle, and you renice your X to -10, you can't
> use X? And your input on the prompt is still very slow?
>
> That would be very weird.

This is what makes me think if I will stick with reiser or not because I need 
x up with vmware and other shit so if i'll try to renice X I won't be able to 
work :-)

>
> I asked you to take the latest 2.4 without patches, but please try the
> latest 2.4 with the latest -pre patch. I'm curious to what that one will
> bring.

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2H9czD4Ii52ssMRArgyAJ9lAXRe11nYnWLOtFG/zAES1irqYgCeMKRg
5MizncSaxkhb1OZw/6AaDF0=
=OViY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Ookhoi]

Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> This is what makes me think if I will stick with reiser or not because
> I need x up with vmware and other shit so if i'll try to renice X I
> won't be able to work :-)

Did I and others not tell you (quite a few times by now) that it is not
reiserfs related?

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:32, Ookhoi wrote:
> Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > This is what makes me think if I will stick with reiser or not because
> > I need x up with vmware and other shit so if i'll try to renice X I
> > won't be able to work :-)
>
> Did I and others not tell you (quite a few times by now) that it is not
> reiserfs related?

sorry, didn't noticed that, si isnt related to reiserfs?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2XAczD4Ii52ssMRAudAAKCLyudL/Mo8zg6VRvIlyKAor2n1pACZAdRq
CAzGg0LQrc2OgdGjuRcfi/4=
=d6Fm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Hans Reiser]

Nicing a compile to -10 should be expected to make your computer 
unusable.  Compiles are resource intensive, and if they have priority, 
then nothing should be left for anything else.  I don't know why your 
activity works for ext3, maybe ext3 is usable in this circumstance 
because it makes you wait more for IO?

-- 
Hans

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 15:33, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Nicing a compile to -10 should be expected to make your computer
> unusable.  Compiles are resource intensive, and if they have priority,
> then nothing should be left for anything else.  I don't know why your
> activity works for ext3, maybe ext3 is usable in this circumstance
> because it makes you wait more for IO?

Well, if this is the reason them I'm happy cuz with ReiserFS I don't have to 
wait for IO? Did I uderstand well? Is this ok not to wait for IO and keep the 
CPU "under fire" ? :-)

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X2aHczD4Ii52ssMRAvO2AJ9rNAYVM82HlB8TFhfC/PP548gqnwCeKKYA
lk91/Ijf4DuVCIs3uuWUNVw=
=WlNQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:

> > You said you had problem with that too, but that is really weird as X
> > would not want 100% cpu.
> > In an other mail you write that your compiles are very fast. If a new
> > kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast anyway, I
> > would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or renice to -5 or
> > some value which does not bother you.
> I don't want to renice compilation threads, only X to get more responsives 
> from it...but this locks me out :-)

Hm, but if you do not renice X, it works ok?

I just noticed:
> Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
>         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k

So if you add X and kde (and other heavy stuff to that), you basically have no RAM,
so probably all the slowdown is from constant swapping.
Just run top when you see the interactive slowdown and look at the swapin/swapout ratio
and swap isage in top & /proc/stat

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 16:07, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > > You said you had problem with that too, but that is really weird as X
> > > would not want 100% cpu.
> > > In an other mail you write that your compiles are very fast. If a new
> > > kernel doesn't solve your problem, and compiles are very fast anyway, I
> > > would say: don't do that then (the renice to -10), or renice to -5 or
> > > some value which does not bother you.
> >
> > I don't want to renice compilation threads, only X to get more
> > responsives from it...but this locks me out :-)
>
> Hm, but if you do not renice X, it works ok?

works but makes my box so slow.........

> I just noticed:
> > Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k
> > buff 59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k
>
> So if you add X and kde (and other heavy stuff to that), you basically have

i just compile kde ( for now I used fluxbox and when I did renice -10 to X, it 
becomed very slow )

> no RAM, so probably all the slowdown is from constant swapping.
> Just run top when you see the interactive slowdown and look at the
> swapin/swapout ratio and swap isage in top & /proc/stat
>
> Bye,
>     Oleg

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X25PczD4Ii52ssMRAtnRAKCZ1LmfBi3U2uzpxj8ypzYDhSYD2QCfZZ2M
RoRNCNMuJF35Iphd5kghjyE=
=JNwI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 04:12:31PM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:

> > I just noticed:
> > > Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k
> > > buff 59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k
> > So if you add X and kde (and other heavy stuff to that), you basically have
> i just compile kde ( for now I used fluxbox and when I did renice -10 to X, it 
> becomed very slow )

So I would be interested in your RAM usage after you run X (even with the fluxbox).
Because now you cannot determine if stuff is slow or not. Is that right?

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Dieter Nützel]

Am Freitag, 28. Februar 2003 14:00 schrieb Voicu Liviu:
> On Friday 28 February 2003 14:56, Ookhoi wrote:
> > Voicu Liviu wrote (ao):
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the
> > > "top" command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line
> > > and another 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> > >
> > > 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > > CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1%
> > > idle Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,
> > > 28344k buff 59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                 
> > > 122280k cached
> > >
> > >   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> > >   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> > >   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> > >   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
> > >     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
> >
> > In your case, there is no reason to renice the compile to -10, as there
> > are no other processes which take cpu, and therefore there is nothing to
> > gain.
>
> This is CORRECT, but think, could I use XFree while some preccese has nice
> value -10? I don't think so
>
> > I still wonder what could be the reason for the bad response of the
> > keyboard.

This has _nothing_ todo with ReiserFS.
Use kernel preemption and low latency.
Read all you can about it on l-K and try the usual Internet search engines.
Maybe you can "nice" X to "-16" with the latest O(1) scheduler to get better 
responce. Your GCC (-10) thing is all _WRONG_. It should be "+10" or maybe 
"+19" the max value like I do regularly with my heavy C/C++ compiler runs.
I can run 2 times 20 or more compiler runs in parallel on my former single 1.0 
GHz Athlon and now my dual Athlon MP 1900+.

Run your compiler liek this:

nice +19 make -j20.

 14:09:49  up 16 min,  1 user,  load average: 19,99, 6,00, 2,77
190 processes: 152 sleeping, 38 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states:  96,3% user   3,2% system   95,4% nice   0,0% iowait   0,0% idle
CPU1 states:  96,0% user   3,2% system   92,2% nice   0,0% iowait   0,0% idle
Mem:  1033372k av,  700216k used,  333156k free,       0k shrd,   55956k buff
        97768k active,             109132k inactive
Swap: 1028120k av,       0k used, 1028120k free                  150408k 
cached

  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE WCHAN     STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME 
COMMAND
 6540 nuetzel   39  19 20092  19M  2232           R N   8,7  1,9   0:01 
cc1plus
 6544 nuetzel   39  19 19972  19M  2256           R N   8,7  1,9   0:01 
cc1plus
 6697 nuetzel   39  19  8564 8564  1816           R N   8,7  0,8   0:01 cc1
 6528 nuetzel   39  19 12820  12M  2260           R N   8,5  1,2   0:01 
cc1plus
 6536 nuetzel   39  19 22520  21M  2252           R N   8,5  2,1   0:01 
cc1plus
 6567 nuetzel   39  19 22004  21M  2236           R N   8,5  2,1   0:01 
cc1plus
 6830 nuetzel   39  19  7684 7684  1812           R N   8,5  0,7   0:00 cc1

Regards,
	Dieter

-- 
Dieter Nützel
Graduate Student, Computer Science

University of Hamburg
Department of Computer Science
@home: Dieter.Nuetzel at hamburg.de (replace at with @)

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[John Dalbec]

Voicu Liviu wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the "top" 
> command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and another 
> 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> 
> 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1% idle
> Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
>         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k 
> cached
> 
>   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
>   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
>   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
>     2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
>     3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
>     4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
>     5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
>     6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
>     9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kreiserfsd
>    33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00 devfsd
>  3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00 metalog
>  3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 metalog
>  3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 sshd

Are you accessing this box via SSH?  (You said it was 45 minutes away.) 
  If so try "renice -10 3729".
John Dalbec

>  3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 screen
> 12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
> 12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
> 31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
> 31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
> 31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee
> 31577 liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash
>   300 portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>   699 portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>   700 portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh
>   701 portage    6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make
>   886 portage    6 -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
> O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
> =uWh1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Jeff Mahoney]

Voicu Liviu wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the "top" 
> command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and another 
> 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> 
> 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1% idle

	If ReiserFS were causing your CPU utilization problems, it would look 
more like this:

CPU0 states:  0.5% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 70.3% idle
CPU1 states:  0.3% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 71.0% idle

	This is the result when I start a stress.sh -n 50 run, which starts 50 
processes all copying a directory to a ReiserFS filesystem. [dual p3 
733] The numbers vary, but the system number is usually higher than just 
a few percent.

	Your system time is only 0.3%, but your user time is 99.4%. It's your 
userland that's taking all your CPU time. There's a large number of  -10 
nice'd processes in there: The result is that those processes get 
scheduler priority, and things that you're looking for interactive 
response from won't get it.

	I noticed that someone further down the list mentioned that your 
slowdown may be sshd not getting enough CPU time. This seems much more 
likely.

	To answer your other question about ReiserFS on a p2 300: I have a 
closet server running with a few hundred GB of ReiserFS filesystems on 
it, acting as an NFS/Samba server, handling internal web traffic, etc.. 
It's got cycles to spare, and it's only a Celeron 300A.

	-Jeff

> Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k buff
>         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k 
> cached
> 
>   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
>   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
>   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
>   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
>     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
>     2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
>     3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
>     4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
>     5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
>     6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
>     9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kreiserfsd
>    33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00 devfsd
>  3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00 metalog
>  3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 metalog
>  3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 sshd
>  3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
>  3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> 12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 screen
> 12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
> 12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
> 31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
> 31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
> 31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee
> 31577 liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash
>   300 portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>   699 portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
>   700 portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh
>   701 portage    6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make
>   886 portage    6 -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
> O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
> =uWh1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
jeffm@suse.com
jeffm@csh.rit.edu

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Vladimir Karavelov]

Hi all,
Does anybody remember that P4 CPUs has a weird thing inside them which slows
down the CPU when it overheats? P4 at 1.5 GHz was for a very little time in
the market and as far as I remember it was mainly as tray, not a boxed
product  (i.e. without original Intel cooler).
I think you must get a trip to the PC and check cooling.
Moths ago I had a problem with P4 PC with stopped cooler. Symptoms was
almost the same.

Regards
Vladimir Karavelov

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Mahoney" <jeffm@suse.com>
To: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>
Cc: <ookhoi@humilis.net>; <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!


> Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the
"top"
> > command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and
another
> > 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> >
> > 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1%
idle
>
> If ReiserFS were causing your CPU utilization problems, it would look
> more like this:
>
> CPU0 states:  0.5% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 70.3% idle
> CPU1 states:  0.3% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 71.0% idle
>
> This is the result when I start a stress.sh -n 50 run, which starts 50
> processes all copying a directory to a ReiserFS filesystem. [dual p3
> 733] The numbers vary, but the system number is usually higher than just
> a few percent.
>
> Your system time is only 0.3%, but your user time is 99.4%. It's your
> userland that's taking all your CPU time. There's a large number of  -10
> nice'd processes in there: The result is that those processes get
> scheduler priority, and things that you're looking for interactive
> response from won't get it.
>
> I noticed that someone further down the list mentioned that your
> slowdown may be sshd not getting enough CPU time. This seems much more
> likely.
>
> To answer your other question about ReiserFS on a p2 300: I have a
> closet server running with a few hundred GB of ReiserFS filesystems on
> it, acting as an NFS/Samba server, handling internal web traffic, etc..
> It's got cycles to spare, and it's only a Celeron 300A.
>
> -Jeff
>
> > Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,   28344k
buff
> >         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                  122280k
> > cached
> >
> >   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> >   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> >   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> >   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
> >     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
> >     2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
> >     3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00
ksoftirqd_CPU0
> >     4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
> >     5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
> >     6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
> >     9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kreiserfsd
> >    33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00 devfsd
> >  3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00 metalog
> >  3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 metalog
> >  3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 sshd
> >  3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> >  3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> >  3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> >  3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> >  3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> >  3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00 agetty
> > 12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00 screen
> > 12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
> > 12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
> > 31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
> > 31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
> > 31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee
> > 31577 liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash
> >   300 portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
> >   699 portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make
> >   700 portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh
> >   701 portage    6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make
> >   886 portage    6 -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
> > O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
> > =uWh1
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> jeffm@suse.com
> jeffm@csh.rit.edu
>

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 01 March 2003 17:40, Vladimir Karavelov wrote:
> Hi all,
> Does anybody remember that P4 CPUs has a weird thing inside them which
> slows down the CPU when it overheats? P4 at 1.5 GHz was for a very little
> time in the market and as far as I remember it was mainly as tray, not a
> boxed product  (i.e. without original Intel cooler).
> I think you must get a trip to the PC and check cooling.
> Moths ago I had a problem with P4 PC with stopped cooler. Symptoms was
> almost the same.

This is what I'm talking about baby :-)
Now I have converted my Pentium2 300Mhz to ReiserFS and all goes just sweet, 
works like a charm....no matter what value I give to "nice" it doesn't lock 
me out of the box.

>
> Regards
> Vladimir Karavelov
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Mahoney" <jeffm@suse.com>
> To: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>
> Cc: <ookhoi@humilis.net>; <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 6:43 PM
> Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!
>
> > Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > OK, so in this mashine I compile kde3.1 and this is the output of the
>
> "top"
>
> > > command ( it took me 5 seconds to write top in the command line and
>
> another
>
> > > 10 antill I saw the output...really slow )
> > >
> > > 35 processes: 31 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> > > CPU states: 99.4% user,  0.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% iowait,  0.1%
>
> idle
>
> > If ReiserFS were causing your CPU utilization problems, it would look
> > more like this:
> >
> > CPU0 states:  0.5% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 70.3% idle
> > CPU1 states:  0.3% user, 28.1% system,  0.0% nice, 71.0% idle
> >
> > This is the result when I start a stress.sh -n 50 run, which starts 50
> > processes all copying a directory to a ReiserFS filesystem. [dual p3
> > 733] The numbers vary, but the system number is usually higher than just
> > a few percent.
> >
> > Your system time is only 0.3%, but your user time is 99.4%. It's your
> > userland that's taking all your CPU time. There's a large number of  -10
> > nice'd processes in there: The result is that those processes get
> > scheduler priority, and things that you're looking for interactive
> > response from won't get it.
> >
> > I noticed that someone further down the list mentioned that your
> > slowdown may be sshd not getting enough CPU time. This seems much more
> > likely.
> >
> > To answer your other question about ReiserFS on a p2 300: I have a
> > closet server running with a few hundred GB of ReiserFS filesystems on
> > it, acting as an NFS/Samba server, handling internal web traffic, etc..
> > It's got cycles to spare, and it's only a Celeron 300A.
> >
> > -Jeff
> >
> > > Mem:   255948k av,  250540k used,    5408k free,       0k shrd,  
> > > 28344k
>
> buff
>
> > >         59512k active,             119096k inactive
> > > Swap:  514072k av,     144k used,  513928k free                 
> > > 122280k cached
> > >
> > >   PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
> > >   889 portage   15 -10 21508  21M  4172 R <  98.9  8.4   0:16 cc1plus
> > >   890 portage    5 -10  2368 2368   752 S <   0.9  0.9   0:00 as
> > >   845 liviu     15   0  1100 1100   792 R     0.1  0.4   0:00 top
> > >     1 root      15   0   484  484   428 S     0.0  0.1   0:05 init
> > >     2 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 keventd
> > >     3 root      34  19     0    0     0 SWN   0.0  0.0   0:00
>
> ksoftirqd_CPU0
>
> > >     4 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kswapd
> > >     5 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00 bdflush
> > >     6 root      15   0     0    0     0 RW    0.0  0.0   0:00 kupdated
> > >     9 root      15   0     0    0     0 SW    0.0  0.0   0:00
> > > kreiserfsd 33 root      15   0   888  888   592 S     0.0  0.3   0:00
> > > devfsd 3612 root      15   0   564  564   488 S     0.0  0.2   0:00
> > > metalog 3614 root      15   0   460  460   416 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > metalog 3729 root      15   0  1252 1252  1128 S     0.0  0.4   0:00
> > > sshd 3740 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 3741 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 3742 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 3743 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 3744 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 3745 root      15   0   412  412   356 S     0.0  0.1   0:00
> > > agetty 12092 root      15   0  1220 1220   836 S     0.0  0.4   0:00
> > > screen 12093 root      15   0  1316 1316  1044 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 sh
> > > 12099 root      10  -5  5492 5492  1896 S <   0.0  2.1   0:07 python2.2
> > > 31549 portage   10 -10   376  376   312 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 sandbox
> > > 31550 portage   10 -10  1172 1172   900 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 ebuild.sh
> > > 31557 portage    5 -10   472  472   396 S <   0.0  0.1   0:00 tee 31577
> > > liviu     15   0  1316 1316  1060 S     0.0  0.5   0:00 bash 300
> > > portage   10 -10   796  796   556 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make 699
> > > portage   10 -10   832  832   576 S <   0.0  0.3   0:00 make 700
> > > portage   10 -10  1052 1052   836 S <   0.0  0.4   0:00 sh 701 portage 
> > >   6 -10  1552 1552   576 S <   0.0  0.6   0:00 make 886 portage    6
> > > -10   640  640   440 S <   0.0  0.2   0:00 g++ -----BEGIN PGP
> > > SIGNATURE-----
> > > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> > >
> > > iD8DBQE+X1qUczD4Ii52ssMRAso7AJ0bAlC3YbXjax28nVe9NbI6/+cJ/ACfX9Lx
> > > O+fZu4gbCPjqSDraeWrYbbk=
> > > =uWh1
> > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > --
> > jeffm@suse.com
> > jeffm@csh.rit.edu

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+YPX/czD4Ii52ssMRAvTwAJ9ozCwnZOdMnxp48Dnsd1A62dbufwCgo1+M
EnflF/A2X7ZCLg9WiovAb2Y=
=CCsc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Hans Reiser]

Oleg Drokin wrote:

>Hello!
>
>On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:11:14AM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Any clue what is going on?
>>Maybe ReiserFS uses the cpu harder?
>>    
>>
>
>reiserfs is using more CPU than ext2/ext3. It's maintaining its metadata in
>balanced tree. Each tree update often requires shifting of some of the data
>between or inside of tree nodes. That's where CPU time is going.
>
>
>  
>
>>I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple emerge 
>>loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%
>>    
>>
>
>Make sure you do not have "CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK" enabled in you kernel config,
>as this enables lots of extra checks in reiserfs code that consume even more CPU.
>
>Bye,
>    Oleg
>
>
>  
>
using notail option will reduce CPU usage, improve read performance, and 
waste some disk space (still better than ext*).

-- 
Hans

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:07, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Oleg Drokin wrote:
> >Hello!
> >
> >On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:11:14AM +0200, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> >>Any clue what is going on?
> >>Maybe ReiserFS uses the cpu harder?
> >
> >reiserfs is using more CPU than ext2/ext3. It's maintaining its metadata
> > in balanced tree. Each tree update often requires shifting of some of the
> > data between or inside of tree nodes. That's where CPU time is going.
> >
> >>I have to fix the CPU usage icon_sad.gif I makes me crazy...simple emerge
> >>loads the CPU to 90 ~ 95%
> >
> >Make sure you do not have "CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK" enabled in you kernel
> > config, as this enables lots of extra checks in reiserfs code that
> > consume even more CPU.
> >
> >Bye,
> >    Oleg
>
> using notail option will reduce CPU usage, improve read performance, and

Already using this :-)
Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some 
process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........

> waste some disk space (still better than ext*).

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1H6czD4Ii52ssMRAkENAJ9Se2K6cCg34qujC5q4BBCS7Z+31gCbBIzy
GIcTxyYFKWtc44my8Cxf1f4=
=oxkP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Marc-Christian Petersen]

On Friday 28 February 2003 13:11, Voicu Liviu wrote:

Hi Voicu,

> Already using this :-)
> Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
out of sheer curiosity: Why you are nicing emerge to -20?!

You are using the O(1) scheduler so I see absolute no need to do so.

ciao, Marc

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:13, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> On Friday 28 February 2003 13:11, Voicu Liviu wrote:
>
> Hi Voicu,
>
> > Already using this :-)
> > Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some

Some times I wanna some process to be finnished faster ( if you know what 
gentoo is (FreeBSD alike) ) so during ext3 usage I never had this problem, I 
could do "nice -n -10 emerge mozilla" and still could work on XFree.......so 
do you understand me why I'm woried about it?
Regards

> > process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
>
> out of sheer curiosity: Why you are nicing emerge to -20?!
>
> You are using the O(1) scheduler so I see absolute no need to do so.
>
> ciao, Marc

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1PJczD4Ii52ssMRAv1wAJ9W+J97cOBuZAGVfbG6UDlsz+eaUgCePh4m
YEdYdqujMtiuDM2tJ6Ro+m8=
=+QyH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Szabolcs Szasz]

Well, as man nice says:

    "Range goes from -20 (highest priority) to 19 (lowest)."

So why is that such a surprise that CPU goes up
to the sky? Why else -20 is there for? (Or am I
missing something?)

Cheers,
Sab


----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc-Christian Petersen" <m.c.p@gmx.net>
To: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>; "Hans Reiser" <reiser@namesys.com>; "Oleg Drokin" <green@namesys.com>
Cc: <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
Sent: 2003. február 28. 13:13
Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!


On Friday 28 February 2003 13:11, Voicu Liviu wrote:

Hi Voicu,

> Already using this :-)
> Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
out of sheer curiosity: Why you are nicing emerge to -20?!

You are using the O(1) scheduler so I see absolute no need to do so.

ciao, Marc

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:23, Szabolcs Szasz wrote:
> Well, as man nice says:
>
>     "Range goes from -20 (highest priority) to 19 (lowest)."
>
> So why is that such a surprise that CPU goes up
> to the sky? Why else -20 is there for? (Or am I
> missing something?)

OK :-)
Here at home I have P2 300 Mhz ext3 based.
If I'll do nice -n -20 some_command_here this will not lock my box :-) really

>
> Cheers,
> Sab
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marc-Christian Petersen" <m.c.p@gmx.net>
> To: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>; "Hans Reiser"
> <reiser@namesys.com>; "Oleg Drokin" <green@namesys.com> Cc:
> <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
> Sent: 2003. február 28. 13:13
> Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!
>
>
> On Friday 28 February 2003 13:11, Voicu Liviu wrote:
>
> Hi Voicu,
>
> > Already using this :-)
> > Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> > process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
>
> out of sheer curiosity: Why you are nicing emerge to -20?!
>
> You are using the O(1) scheduler so I see absolute no need to do so.
>
> ciao, Marc

- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1yDczD4Ii52ssMRAqxHAJ4q/QcrCv7v+aZw3K1zirpPid/weQCfck7F
LuF68EtGmeIqu+oaPJ61NYc=
=IKJZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Szabolcs Szasz]

Yep, sorry, I figured it RIGHT AFTER pressing that
damn Send button... :) Sorry again for spammin'...
(I just saw Hans, too, making a mistake on this
topic, so I can breathe a little easier now... ;-P )

Cheers,
Sab

----- Original Message -----
From: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>
To: "Szabolcs Szasz" <sz@szasz.hu>; <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
Sent: 2003. február 28. 13:56
Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:23, Szabolcs Szasz wrote:
> Well, as man nice says:
>
>     "Range goes from -20 (highest priority) to 19 (lowest)."
>
> So why is that such a surprise that CPU goes up
> to the sky? Why else -20 is there for? (Or am I
> missing something?)

OK :-)
Here at home I have P2 300 Mhz ext3 based.
If I'll do nice -n -20 some_command_here this will not lock my box :-) really

>
> Cheers,
> Sab
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marc-Christian Petersen" <m.c.p@gmx.net>
> To: "Voicu Liviu" <liviu.voicu@huji.ac.il>; "Hans Reiser"
> <reiser@namesys.com>; "Oleg Drokin" <green@namesys.com> Cc:
> <reiserfs-list@namesys.com>
> Sent: 2003. február 28. 13:13
> Subject: Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!
>
>
> On Friday 28 February 2003 13:11, Voicu Liviu wrote:
>
> Hi Voicu,
>
> > Already using this :-)
> > Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> > process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
>
> out of sheer curiosity: Why you are nicing emerge to -20?!
>
> You are using the O(1) scheduler so I see absolute no need to do so.
>
> ciao, Marc

- --
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1yDczD4Ii52ssMRAqxHAJ4q/QcrCv7v+aZw3K1zirpPid/weQCfck7F
LuF68EtGmeIqu+oaPJ61NYc=
=IKJZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Toby Dickenson]

On Friday 28 February 2003 12:11 pm, Voicu Liviu wrote:

> Already using this :-)
> Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........

If that means the compile finishes faster (and you havent said whether or not 
it does) then isnt using more of the cpu a good thing?

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Voicu Liviu]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 28 February 2003 14:25, Toby Dickenson wrote:
> On Friday 28 February 2003 12:11 pm, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > Already using this :-)
> > Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of some
> > process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
>
> If that means the compile finishes faster (and you havent said whether or
> not it does) then isnt using more of the cpu a good thing?

It's ok but this killes my keyboard and really can't do anything else :-(
- -- 
Voicu Liviu

Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Rothberg International School
Assistant Programmer & Network Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+X1dPczD4Ii52ssMRAnm5AJ9qGSKAbS0BizruYV66f65r6ceyXACggsWU
EHQRzGlVNqYYzfG4fdZvtDA=
=1NNO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: ReiserFS causes CPU high usage?!

[Marc-Christian Petersen]

On Friday 28 February 2003 13:34, Voicu Liviu wrote:

Hi Voicu,

> On Friday 28 February 2003 14:25, Toby Dickenson wrote:
> > On Friday 28 February 2003 12:11 pm, Voicu Liviu wrote:
> > > Already using this :-)
> > > Any way, the system works great but if I change the "nice" value of
> > > some process then the CPU almost becomes slave of this process.........
> >
> > If that means the compile finishes faster (and you havent said whether or
> > not it does) then isnt using more of the cpu a good thing?
> It's ok but this killes my keyboard and really can't do anything else :-(
Hmm, this sounds too strange. I cannot see why ext3 does not have this problem 
where ReiserFS has a problem, during a kernel compilation.

I have a Celeron, 1,3GHz and it doesn't matter what FS I use, if I nice a 
kernel compilation to -20, I can still work w/o any strangeness.

ciao, Marc