From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265215AbUHHJED (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Aug 2004 05:04:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265224AbUHHJED (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Aug 2004 05:04:03 -0400 Received: from damned.travellingkiwi.com ([81.6.239.220]:64106 "EHLO ballbreaker.travellingkiwi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265215AbUHHJEA (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Aug 2004 05:04:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4115EC6C.5040608@travellingkiwi.com> Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 10:03:40 +0100 From: Hamie User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (X11/20040715) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox Cc: Russell King , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: ide-cs using 100% CPU References: <40FA4328.4060304@travellingkiwi.com> <20040806202747.H13948@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <4113DD20.1010808@travellingkiwi.com> <1091917597.19077.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1091917597.19077.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.84.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: >On Gwe, 2004-08-06 at 20:33, Hamie wrote: > > >>Is 100% CPU not excessive? IIRC my PIII-750 used to use less CPU doing >>the same job as quick, or even slightly faster... >> >> > >PCMCIA IDE is PIO only so it burns CPU. This is one case where >hyperthreading is nice. Cardbus IDE is a lot better but very little >exists and we don't currently support hotplug IDE controllers. > > > Ah right. But would a CF memory card be cardbus anyway? >>And should it not use system CPU rather than user CPU? >> >> > >Yes - but figure out please if the kernel or userspace is getting that >wrong ;) > > > My apologies. It was gkrellm leading me up the garden path on that one... Copying about 100MB from a 512MB CF card (25+ photos from my camera) vmstat 5 reports 4% usercpu, 96% system cpu. And the response on the system is sluggish to say the least. (Moving the pointer in X is painful :). gkrell meanwhile on it's cpu graph shows about 30% system, and the rest as userCPU. No idea why, I guess till I find out I'll just regard gkrellm's cpu graph as a waste of space (To differentiate system & user cpu anyway :). > >