NO_HZ and cpu monitoring tools

2007-10-14 Thread Anton Blanchard

Hi,

When using a NO_HZ kernel on ppc64, I noticed top gives some interesting
results:

Cpu0  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,100.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu1  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu2  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu3  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu4  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu5  :  1.1%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni, 98.9%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu6  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu7  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st

Notice how only 2 cpus report idle time. Im guessing this happens if 
a core sleeps for longer than the update period in top. Where should
this be fixed?

It would be possible for the proc read method to add in the right number
of idle jiffies, or top could just assume no increment means 100% idle.

Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


NO_HZ and cpu monitoring tools

2007-10-14 Thread Anton Blanchard

Hi,

When using a NO_HZ kernel on ppc64, I noticed top gives some interesting
results:

Cpu0  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,100.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu1  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu2  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu3  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu4  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu5  :  1.1%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni, 98.9%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu6  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu7  :  0.0%us,  0.0%sy,  0.0%ni,  0.0%id,  0.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.0%si, 0.0%st

Notice how only 2 cpus report idle time. Im guessing this happens if 
a core sleeps for longer than the update period in top. Where should
this be fixed?

It would be possible for the proc read method to add in the right number
of idle jiffies, or top could just assume no increment means 100% idle.

Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/