From: Mikhail Ramendik <mr@ramendik.ru>
To: Andreas Hartmann <andihartmann@freenet.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.4 : 100% CPU use on EIDE disk operarion, VIA chipset
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 23:57:55 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1081108674.1072.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <406FC621.1090507@A88da.a.pppool.de>
Hello,
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> > As recommended there, I have tried 2.6.5-rc3-mm4.
> >
> > No change. Still 100% CPU usage; the performance seems teh same.
>
> Yes. But it's curious:
> Take a tar-file, e.g. tar the compiled 2.6 kernel directory. Than, untar
> it again - the machine behaves total normaly.
Not really. I tried a "simple" tar (no gzib/bzip2) - it was the same as
with cp, a near-100% CPU "system" load, most of it iowait.
If I use bzip2 with tar, then yes, the load is nearly 100% "user",
actually it's bzip2. But this is because the disk i/o is done at a *far*
slower rate; the bottleneck is the CPU. If we don't read (or write) the
disk heavily, naturally the system/iowait load is low.
I tried doing a "cp" in another xterm window, while the tar/bzip2 was
running. And sure enough, up the CPU system/iowait usage goes - the
"cp"'s disk i/o takes much of the CPU time away from the bz2 task! Looks
exactly like a cause of performance problems.
(All of this was done on 2.6.5-rc3-mm4).
Yours, Mikhail Ramendik
> And the 2.6-kernel is about
> 23% faster than the 2.4-kernel.
>
>
> > Yours, Mikhail Ramendik
> >
> > P.S. Sorry for making all comments into answers to your letter. I just
> > don't want to break the thread.
>
> No problem - it's easier to read with comment directly in the text.
>
>
> Regards,
> Andreas Hartmann
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-04 19:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.g80v5s8.b2ofhi@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.idlmgtf.1pluljl@ifi.uio.no>
2004-04-04 8:07 ` 2.6.4 : 100% CPU use on EIDE disk operarion, VIA chipset Andreas Hartmann
2004-04-05 2:12 ` Bill Davidsen
[not found] ` <fa.ljb660n.d2ofa9@ifi.uio.no>
2004-04-04 8:24 ` Andreas Hartmann
2004-04-04 19:57 ` Mikhail Ramendik [this message]
2004-04-05 2:14 ` Bill Davidsen
[not found] <fa.ld6rcgc.1lhmd9q@ifi.uio.no>
2004-04-03 11:24 ` Andreas Hartmann
2004-04-03 12:51 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-04-03 14:12 ` Mikhail Ramendik
2004-04-04 8:02 ` Mikhail Ramendik
2004-04-02 21:54 Mikhail Ramendik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1081108674.1072.4.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=mr@ramendik.ru \
--cc=andihartmann@freenet.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox