From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 25 03:16:51 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63AD106564A for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 03:16:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: from oproxy3-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy3-pub.bluehost.com [69.89.21.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 801CC8FC14 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 03:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 18427 invoked by uid 0); 25 Jan 2011 03:16:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box543.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.143) by oproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 25 Jan 2011 03:16:50 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=apotheon.com; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Mail-Followup-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:User-Agent:X-Identified-User; b=jQHiM6Y6LJLIyb8ZHSQ3hPnl43hD2D/cczVZfX1f4wLrbnNMXsV8Qkk4t6nBvogknq/jv1TlPuypODbkSo3O82RPN1ZpESYw6gfvKO71E55Hq1KdInq8+Rb7vgaDzSaG; Received: from c-24-8-180-234.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.8.180.234] helo=kukaburra.hydra) by box543.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PhZOj-0001wN-MM for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:16:50 -0700 Received: by kukaburra.hydra (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:07:25 -0700 Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:07:25 -0700 From: Chad Perrin To: FreeBSD Questions Message-ID: <20110125030725.GA62670@guilt.hydra> Mail-Followup-To: FreeBSD Questions References: <20110124235740.GA62134@guilt.hydra> <1295917366.59721.2.camel@main> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1295917366.59721.2.camel@main> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Identified-User: {2737:box543.bluehost.com:apotheon:apotheon.org} {sentby:smtp auth 24.8.180.234 authed with ren@apotheon.org} Subject: Re: more CPU being used than I have (?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 03:16:51 -0000 --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 01:02:46AM +0000, Craig Butler wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 16:57 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > I'm running a two-core laptop that, once in a great while, shows > > approximately 250% CPU usage by a single process in top. How exactly > > does that work? > >=20 > > Note: It's not entirely surprising that this particular process is > > consuming a lot of resources. It's just surprising to me that it's > > consuming more than CPUs * 100%. >=20 > Hi Chad >=20 > Its to do with top using weighted CPU percentage... for some reason this > show peaks as more usage than 100% -- maybe something to do with the top > averaging out over a specific time. > I find that raw CPU mode gives a more accurate representation.=20 >=20 > raw mode is toggled by passing the -C argument to top. Do you have a reference to a relatively simple explanation of how that weighting works (and why)? --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk0+Pm0ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKVCdgCgv9cvXg/TTYLhL7cmQfa3thnO bWIAoL1FfqVgBT3X4AeBmjdcc3TPUyBv =mPjG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn--