See this updated file added to bug 985661
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/105809696/commit_low_load_rev2.png
The same update was also sent upstream to one of the mail lists about
propagating the patch to other kernels.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bug
See this file added to the bug 985661 mentioned above:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/104693152/commit_low_load.png
Myself, I still prefer the patch for overall better load average reporting, but
then I don't use desktop versions of ubuntu.
Note: I also sent the same information upstream.
--
Y
see also bug 985661 (
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/985661 )
I made a kernel with the patch taken out and verified, basically 0 load average
(which we already know load averages are always at or near 0 no matter what the
real load is undet these conditions.)
I also verifie
** Attachment added: "Test results for very low CPU use, but high frequency
enter/exit idle"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/3130569/+files/high01.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
O.K., so much for my due diligence testing speech above.
I have created a senario similar to what Olivier reported above, and yes
indeed I also am seeing reported load averages that are very much too
high (Oh, darn).
At the moment I am not setup for compiling the kernel, but I can be in a
short t
Addendum (to post#53): I see the errors and omitions in my previous
reply, in that more time had passed between "ps waux" commands than I
thought and I was glossing over the "vmstat" results. I'll see if I can
create a similar senario as you, for context switch rates and interrupt
rates with very h
While most of the entries in this bug report are about creating and
testing with high load averages, as part of due diligence tests and
sanity checks were also done under low load conditions. Myself and with
the final patch version, I have never observed incorrect high reported
load averages under
Hello,
I'm afraid this fix has the annoying side effect of reporting a higher
than real load on idle systems. At least that's my conclusion after
digging why my precise pangolin desktop was hardly getting below 0.5
even when idling.
Attached is the output of (ps waux; for i in 1 2 3; do uptime; v
Tested O.K., and as expected, on:
doug@s15:~$ uname -a
Linux s15 3.2.0-22-generic #35-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 3 18:33:15 UTC 2012 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
This bug was fixed in the package linux - 3.2.0-22.35
---
linux (3.2.0-22.35) precise; urgency=low
[ Andy Whitcroft ]
* Revert "SAUCE: hotkey quirks for various Zeptro Znote and Fujitsu Amilo
laptops"
* SAUCE: (no-up) elide some ioctl warnings which are known benign
- L
By the way, the fix is finally included in Kernel 3.4RC1. (it never made any
3.3 kernel)
doug@test-smy:~$ uname -a
Linux test-smy 3.4.0-030400rc1-generic-pae #201203312035 SMP Sun Apr 1 00:50:08
UTC 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
doug@test-smy:~$ cat /proc/version
Linux version 3.4.0-030400rc1-gen
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go t
Opps, typo...
this:
"... and even an old style tickless kernel ..."
should be this:
"... and even an old style tick based kernel ..."
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load
Yes, it all looks fine.
Note that my test case is pretty extreme, and even an old style tickless kernel
will start to have deviations between real and resported load averages under
such conditions, as demonstrated in some previous postings.
I could do some less extreme tests, such as 25 hertz sl
@Doug,
So that indicates 1) I didn't mess up the backport and 2) it's doing
what is expected.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notificatio
** Attachment added: "Same computer, but 12.04 with Brad F. test Kernel - 250
Hz"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2968200/+files/kernel_brad01_250.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
** Attachment added: "An 11.10 computer with kernel.org patch - 250 Hz"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2968199/+files/yes_250_peter02.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
I did the 6 hour test so that I could make a graph to compare with a peviously
posted graph of the fix on an 11.10 computer. However, I seem to be a little
dense because I picked a run case that I had not previously posted here (it is
in my web notes).
So, in a moment I will add two attachments,
Note that I have already tested to death the exact patch of the above
referenced commit. However, I mainly did so with an 11.10 computer. That
computer has since been migrated to 12.04 beta for iso and other
testing.
One test computer:
doug@s15:~$ uname -a
Linux s15 3.2.0-20-generic #33~lp838811
I've backported the upstream commit (trivial backport). Test kernels are
available at: http://people.canonical.com/~bradf/lp838811 . Please test
the appropriate kernel for you and reply back to this bug whether it
fixed the issue for you or not.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: In Prog
This now appears to be upstream commit:
c308b56b5398779cd3da0f62ab26b0453494c3d4
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Brad Figg (brad-figg)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Kernel 3.3 mainline (just released) does not contain the patch.
Based on an e-mail from 2012.03.12 from some tip-bot, I thought it might be
included.
doug@test-smy:~$ uname -a
Linux test-smy 3.3.0-030300-generic-pae #201203182135 SMP Mon Mar 19 01:50:11
UTC 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
doug@te
kernel 3.3-rc7 (kernel.org 2012.03.10) does not include the patch.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
htt
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
http
O.K., I see that the request to test with kernel 3.2.0-18.28 just preceeded, by
many hours, that kernel actually being available via apt-get dist-upgrade. This
morning it is available...
doug@test-smy:~$ cat /proc/version
Linux version 3.2.0-18-generic-pae (buildd@rothera) (gcc version 4.6.3
(Ub
I have two test computers: One has my kernel build environment for this
issue, and I don't want to mess that up just yet; The other is too
pathetic to compile the kernel, and is the one on which I do these
kernel request tests.
I do not knnow if it is relevant, but yesterday I did a complete new
i
Thank you for taking the time to file a bug report on this issue.
However, given the number of bugs that the Kernel Team receives during
any development cycle it is impossible for us to review them all.
Therefore, we occasionally resort to using automated bots to request
further testing. This is s
Thanks for the update and getting your patch upstream, Doug.
What mailing list was the mail from Peter posted to? I didn't see it on
LKML.
I can build a test kernel once this patch lands in Linus' mainline tree.
We can then cherry pick the path until it lands in the stable tree.
--
You receive
** Attachment added: "peter02 patch at high idle frequency"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2801510/+files/yes_421_peter02.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.lau
I heard back from Peter Zijlstra who is one of the sched.c mainatiners at
kernel.org.
Attached is his signed off patch. There was a one line change since that
e-mail, that I will not botther to post here.
I tested what I refer to as the "peter02" patch, and it gives the same results
as my propos
** Attachment added: "Shows Reported Load Averages with tickless and peter02
fix"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2801498/+files/yes_25_peter02.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ub
Thanks, Doug.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838
This issue has not been sent upstream. I have studied how to do so, and
will do so, and will report back to this bug report as new information
comes.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83881
Thank you for providing a patch, and making Ubuntu better.
Can you provide some information on the status of the patch with regards
to getting it merged upstream? Has it been sent upstream, what sort of
feedback has it received, is it getting applied to a subsystem
maintainer's tree, etc?
People
1.) Doing what was asked:
First, note that the image I needed was not available in the RC5 directory, so
I used the appropriate image from the RC4 directory. See "2" below for the
explanation as to why I know the results would be the same for RC5.
While the local terminal did not work with this
** Attachment added: "Original patch at high idle frequency"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2792388/+files/yes_421hz.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpa
** Attachment added: "patch variant 2 (now preferred patch) at high idle
frequency"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2792389/+files/yes_410hz_v2.png
** Tags removed: needs-upstream-testing
** Tags added: kernel-bug-exists-upstream
--
You received this
** Attachment added: "Control sample at high idle frequency"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2792352/+files/no_410hz.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad
** Attachment added: "Original proposed patch fixed for CodingStyle and in
better format (I hope)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2792350/+files/diff_proposed.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
** Attachment added: "Proposed patch variant 2 (this is actually easier)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2792351/+files/diff_proposed_v2.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
h
Would it be possible for you to test the latest upstream kernel? It
will allow additional upstream developers to examine the issue. Refer to
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelMainlineBuilds . Please test the latest
v3.3 kernel[1] (Not a kernel in the daily directory). Once you've
tested the upstream
Issue re-confirmed.
doug@test-smy:~$ uname -a
Linux test-smy 3.2.0-17-generic-pae #27-Ubuntu SMP Fri Feb 24 15:59:25 UTC 2012
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Thank you for taking the time to file a bug report on this issue.
However, given the number of bugs that the Kernel Team receives during
any development cycle it is impossible for us to review them all.
Therefore, we occasionally resort to using automated bots to request
further testing. This is s
** Tags added: patch
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+
** Attachment removed: "test program as a text file"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2738884/+files/waiter.txt
** Attachment added: "Test Program as a text file."
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2773102/+files/
** Tags removed: oneric
** Tags added: oneiric
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.
** Description changed:
- Description:Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS
- Release:10.04
- 2.6.37-02063706-generic
+ Description:Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS, 10.10. 11.04. 11.10, 12.04 pre-release
+ Release:10.04, 10.10, 11.04, 11.10, 12.04 pre-release
+ 2.6.37-02063706-generic, and all kernels sin
Issue remains (actually it is not possible for it to be solved without
edits to the calc_load area of sched.c, either my proposed edits or some
other solution). I see bart already set this back to confirmed.
doug@test-smy:~$ uname -a
Linux test-smy 3.2.0-17-generic-pae #26-Ubuntu SMP Fri Feb 17 23
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
h
Thank you for taking the time to file a bug report on this issue.
However, given the number of bugs that the Kernel Team receives during
any development cycle it is impossible for us to review them all.
Therefore, we occasionally resort to using automated bots to request
further testing. This is s
I tested Doug's patch on 3.0.0-16 in tickless mode, and it seems to
report the same or similar results as the same kernel without the patch
and ticks enabled.
Attached is a before and after load average graph, ignore the spike that
was the kernel compiling Doug's patch.
** Attachment added: "web1
** Attachment added: "Shows Reported Load Averages with tickless and with
proposed fix"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2745500/+files/yes_25hz.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ub
** Attachment added: "Shows Reported Load Averages with no changes."
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2745497/+files/yes_25hz_control.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https:
** Attachment added: "shows Reported Load Averages for tickless mode (I.E. the
way things used to be before tickless existed)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2745498/+files/no_25hz.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
** Attachment added: "shows Reported Load Average as a function of idle rate"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2745486/+files/load_freq_s15.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
My related comments were lost when I changed the status. I will re-type
them:
I upgraded my very pathetic, very old test computer.
doug@test-smy:~/linux-3.2.0/kernel$ uname -a
Linux test-smy 3.2.0-16-generic-pae #25-Ubuntu SMP Tue Feb 14 04:00:45 UTC 2012
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
It has the Low
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
h
It seems that kernel 3.0.0-15 is still the latest for ubuntu server version
11.10, which is what runs on my test computers.
As mentioned in my original posting, I downloaded the most recent kernel source
directly from kernel.org (3.3 RC2 (at the time)) and looked at code area in
question. It is
Thank you for taking the time to file a bug report on this issue.
However, given the number of bugs that the Kernel Team receives during
any development cycle it is impossible for us to review them all.
Therefore, we occasionally resort to using automated bots to request
further testing. This is s
** Tags added: maverick natty oneric precise
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.ne
I can not seem to edit the tags. I want to expand them to other release
names, but they keep disappearing after my edit.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too
** Attachment added: "Proposed patch code fragment - for kernel/sched.c -
calc_load area of code"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2738894/+files/sched_patch_doug04.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
** Attachment added: "test program as a text file"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2738884/+files/waiter.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83
** Attachment added: "diff between original code and my code"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/838811/+attachment/2738883/+files/diff.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.ne
This issue is identical to bug # 513848. There was a patch listed there
by Chase Douglas, but there has been some code changes since, and it
would need to be changed to work (at least I couldn't get it to work).
The root issue remains the same, for a tickless system any idle
transition during the 1
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average too low
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
h
** Attachment added: "lspci-vnvn.log"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811/+attachment/2339924/+files/lspci-vnvn.log
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/838811
Title:
load average to
67 matches
Mail list logo
