From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Tino Keitel <tino.keitel@tikei.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@lycos.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] [Linux 3.2] top/htop and all other CPU usage metering applications has gone crackers
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:14:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111129081428.GC2675@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111128214125.GA29558@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3182 bytes --]
On Mon 28-11-11 22:41:25, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon 28-11-11 21:19:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, November 28, 2011, Tino Keitel wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:45:57 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, November 27, 2011, Tino Keitel wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 21:05:53 +0100, Tino Keitel wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:30:15 +0000, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd like to report a weird regression in Linux 3.2 (running rc3 now) - all CPU metering applications have gone terribly mad
> > > > > > > under this kernel:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I get the same using top, htop and the gnome system monitor with kernel
> > > > > > 3.2 on a Sandy Bridge quad core box, running Debian unstable.
> > > > >
> > > > > I just tested 3.2-rc2, and see the same bug.
> > > >
> > > > I'm seeing that too on one of my test boxes, but not all the time
> > > > (i.e. there are periods in which the readings are correct). The other boxes
> > > > I've tested with 3.2-rc are fine in that respect.
> > > >
> > > > Also, it seems that it shows 100%-(real load) when it is wrong. So, it looks
> > > > like there's an overflow somewhere in the CPU load measuring code, at least
> > > > on some CPUs.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I reverted this commit and so far it looks good:
> > >
> > > commit a25cac5198d4ff2842ccca63b423962848ad24b2
> > > Author: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> > > Date: Wed Aug 24 09:40:25 2011 +0200
> > >
> > > proc: Consider NO_HZ when printing idle and iowait times
> > >
> > > I'll report back tomorrow how the kernel behaves.
> >
> > Hmm. Michal, can you have a look at that, please?
>
> Hmm, my testing didn't show anything like that. Could you post
> cat /proc/stat collected every second during 30s or so?
>
> Here is the output of my run with 3.2.0-rc3-00004-gdd38d29 and the attached config:
> for i in `seq 30`;
> do
> cat /proc/stat > `date +'%s'`
> sleep 1
> done
> export old_user=0 old_nice=0 old_sys=0 old_idle=0 old_iowait=0;
> grep cpu0 * | while read cpu user nice sys idle iowait rest;
> do
> echo $cpu $(($user-$old_user)) $(($nice-$old_nice)) $(($sys-$old_sys)) $(($idle-$old_idle)) $(($iowait-$old_iowait))
> old_user=$user old_nice=$nice old_sys=$sys old_idle=$idle old_iowait=$iowait
> done
>
Same results (attached) x86_64 with AMD 16CPUs in my lab with a
different cpuidle driver:
grep . -r /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuidle/
$ /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuidle/current_driver:none
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuidle/current_governor_ro:menu
$ grep . -r /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate_min:10000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_rate:38000
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/up_threshold:40
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_down_factor:1
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice_load:0
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/powersave_bias:0
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/io_is_busy:0
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic
[-- Attachment #2: config.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 33394 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #3: amd_16cpus.tar.bz2 --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 3958 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-29 8:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-24 10:30 Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-24 20:05 ` Tino Keitel
2011-11-27 11:04 ` Tino Keitel
2011-11-27 11:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-27 11:45 ` Tino Keitel
2011-11-27 11:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-27 11:57 ` Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-28 19:55 ` Tino Keitel
2011-11-28 20:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-28 21:41 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-28 21:43 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-28 21:48 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 8:14 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2011-11-29 21:25 ` Tino Keitel
2011-11-29 21:16 ` Maciej Rutecki
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=20111129081428.GC2675@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=t.artem@lycos.com \
--cc=tino.keitel@tikei.de \
/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®