On 2016.04.28 11:46 Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
>Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they
> have no load at all.
>
> Uptime and /proc/loadavg on all systems with kernels released during the
> last five years up until kernel version 4.6-rc5, show a 5- and
On 2016.04.28 11:46 Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
>Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they
> have no load at all.
>
> Uptime and /proc/loadavg on all systems with kernels released during the
> last five years up until kernel version 4.6-rc5, show a 5- and
On 21/01/2016 19:38, Doug Smythies wrote:
new = (old * 2037 + load * (2048 - 2037)) / 2048
new = (1862 * 2037 + 2048 * (2048 - 2037)) / 2048
new = 1862
So, the 100% load will always be shown as 91% (double the old limit).
Math seems sound, but the fact is that the load on all my test machines
On 2016.01.21 07:29 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:23:25AM +0100, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
>> Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they have
>> no load at all.
>> ---
>> Subject: sched: Fix non-zero idle loadavg
>> From: Vik Heyndrickx
>> Date: Thu,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:23:25AM +0100, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they have
> no load at all.
Thanks, I've edited the patch Changelog to include a few extra details
you mentioned in our preview correspondence.
See below. Please
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:23:25AM +0100, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they have
> no load at all.
Thanks, I've edited the patch Changelog to include a few extra details
you mentioned in our preview correspondence.
See below. Please
On 2016.01.21 07:29 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:23:25AM +0100, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
>> Systems show a minimal load average of 0.00, 0.01, 0.05 even when they have
>> no load at all.
>> ---
>> Subject: sched: Fix non-zero idle loadavg
>> From: Vik Heyndrickx
On 21/01/2016 19:38, Doug Smythies wrote:
new = (old * 2037 + load * (2048 - 2037)) / 2048
new = (1862 * 2037 + 2048 * (2048 - 2037)) / 2048
new = 1862
So, the 100% load will always be shown as 91% (double the old limit).
Math seems sound, but the fact is that the load on all my test machines
8 matches
Mail list logo