From: "David Luyer" <david_luyer@pacific.net.au>
To: "'Alan Cox'" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Linux 2.4.19ac3rc3 on IBM x330/x340 SMP - "ps" time skew
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 22:59:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00c201c23892$1c5fb450$638317d2@pacific.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1028122125.8510.52.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Alan Cox wrote:
> > procps version is 2.0.7 (Debian 3.0).
> >
> > Where's the mistake -- should timer interrupts be on both
> > CPUs (I think this is the problem), or is procps miscalculating
> > Hz (seems less likely, someone would have noticed by now...)?
>
> HZ on x86 for user space is defined as 100. Its a procps problem
Slight error in my initial diagnosis of why procps is getting Hertz
wrong tho. It's not because timer interrupts are only happening
on one CPU. It's because it thinks I have 4 CPUs per system, when
really I only have 2 CPUs per system.
It's taking jiffies from the sum of the figures on the first line
of /proc/stat and dividing by the uptime in seconds from /proc/uptime
multiplied by the number of CPUs. The system has two CPUs, #0 and #1,
and is reporting _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF as 4 (the count used by procps
as the number of CPUs).
Looks like even if it is procps's fault for not just using HZ==100,
the kernel is leading it astray by claiming I have twice as many
CPUs as I really do.
uyer@praxis8:~$ make cpus
cc cpus.c -o cpus
luyer@praxis8:~$ cat cpus.c
#include <unistd.h>
main () {
printf("%d\n", sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF));
}
luyer@praxis8:~$ ./cpus
4
luyer@praxis8:~$ grep 'processor ' /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
processor : 1
luyer@praxis8:~$ dmesg | grep -E 'Initializing CPU|CPU #. not
responding'
Initializing CPU#0
Initializing CPU#1
CPU #3 not responding - cannot use it.
David.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-31 12:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-31 11:01 David Luyer
2002-07-31 13:28 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-31 12:59 ` David Luyer [this message]
2002-07-31 14:26 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-31 13:18 ` David Luyer
2002-07-31 13:31 ` Dana Lacoste
2002-07-31 13:38 ` David Luyer
2002-07-31 15:04 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-31 13:57 ` David Luyer
2002-07-31 16:15 ` NMI watchdog, die(), & console_loglevel Jonathan Lundell
2002-07-31 19:14 ` Linux 2.4.19ac3rc3 on IBM x330/x340 SMP - "ps" time skew Albert D. Cahalan
2002-08-01 0:37 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-31 23:49 ` Dave Jones
2002-08-01 1:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 0:19 ` Dave Jones
2002-07-31 23:42 ` Lincoln Dale
2002-08-01 1:33 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2002-08-01 3:34 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-01 14:16 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 8:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2002-08-01 11:40 ` Lincoln Dale
2002-08-01 18:26 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2002-08-01 14:15 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-07-31 2:46 David Luyer
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='00c201c23892$1c5fb450$638317d2@pacific.net.au' \
--to=david_luyer@pacific.net.au \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®