public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Fred Fan <fanyefeng@gmail.com>
Cc: cocala <syy.wxd@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, rick.jones2@hp.com,
	gallatin@myri.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	dada1@cosmosbay.com, brice@myri.com, paulus@samba.org,
	benh@kernel.crashing.org, mingo@elte.hu, gregkh@suse.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: inaccurate cpu idle time from top command
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:58:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090727095841.7a584c4f@skybase> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f495dc80907252034i4bdd812cx2267d65af7d993d8@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:34:02 +0800
Fred Fan <fanyefeng@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi cocala:
>     I have met same issue. And we found the total utilization
> count(added by idle's utilization) is not 100% in detail processes
> information fields.
>    best Regards
> Fred
> 
> 2009/7/24 cocala <syy.wxd@gmail.com>:
> > I saw one commit "3209ada8285a9fa6ab8f7a731d54031ec884c745 - sched: account
> > system time properly"
> > This commit is to take into account timer IRQ interrupting the idle task
> > servicing a hard or soft irq.
> >
> > If a softirq is started in a tick, all the time in the tick will be counted
> > as soft irq time even most time in the tick is idle.
> > In our use case, one jiffy is 10ms and the 1G net driver will generate many
> > software irq, so the "top" command will show high softare irq time and cpu
> > idle time approaches to zero.
> > If I change the jiffy to 1ms, the "top" command shows much higher cpu idle
> > time. I think this algorithm is also not fair for some cases.
> >
> > Is there any better way to count the softare irq time?
> >
> > Thanks
> > cocala

There is a solution to this problem but not all architectures have
implemented it. Currently only s390, powerpc and ia64 have defined
CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING which allows the architecture backend to do
its own, precise math. The backdraw of the improved accounting is
i) some complicated code, and ii) a slight performance penalty. So far
nobody wanted to implement it for x86.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


      reply	other threads:[~2009-07-27  7:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <458a17f90907240745m15c3d7ep893a01a035bf0146@mail.gmail.com>
2009-07-26  3:34 ` inaccurate cpu idle time from top command Fred Fan
2009-07-27  7:58   ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]

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=20090727095841.7a584c4f@skybase \
    --to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=brice@myri.com \
    --cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=fanyefeng@gmail.com \
    --cc=gallatin@myri.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
    --cc=syy.wxd@gmail.com \
    /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