Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 21:29:16 -0500 From: Chris Ross <cross+freebsd@distal.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top's CPUn vs C column Message-ID: <580563A6-1C98-46E9-9B2E-3BC7FD262773@distal.com> In-Reply-To: <201303041137.44337.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <F4434B21-1E12-4F9F-9A17-450F3192AAD6@distal.com> <201303041137.44337.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That patch does in fact work, and removes the inconsistency that I
noted earlier. I would be happy to see it committed. If no one else
has objections, please do.
Thanks...
- Chris
On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:37 , John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Friday, March 01, 2013 1:17:41 pm Chris Ross wrote:
>>=20
>> So, I was looking at a v240 I have running stable/9 (9.1-STABLE), =
and=20
>> noticed something odd. The per-CPU information displayed by top =
seems=20
>> inconsistent. To simplify things, while I'm running a "make release" =
in=20
>> /usr/src/release, I just started running the following command over =
and over=20
>> (by hand):
>>=20
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> 1044 cross 1 72 0 17128K 4464K CPU1 0 0:01 1.27% =
zsh
>> 22528 root 1 77 5 11672K 2592K CPU1 1 0:00 0.00% =
sh
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> 22634 cross 1 72 0 12808K 2872K CPU1 1 0:00 0.00% =
top
>> 22633 root 1 77 5 6272K 880K CPU0 1 0:00 0.00% =
make
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> 22637 root 1 77 5 6272K 1656K CPU0 0 0:00 0.00% =
make
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> cross: top | grep " CPU"
>> 22684 root 1 77 5 11672K 2592K CPU0 0 0:00 0.00% =
sh
>> cross:
>>=20
>> This displayed what I had earlier seen in the full-screen top. =
There=20
>> doesn't appear to be any specific binding between the "n" in the =
"CPUn" state=20
>> value, and the number in the "C" column, which is according to the =
man page,=20
>> should mean the same thing.
>>=20
> No, they are different things. The man page is a bit stale. The 'C' =
column=20
> is the CPU that the process last ran on. Hmm, it's actually easiest =
to fix=20
> the code I think. Try this (untested) change:
>=20
> Index: usr.bin/top/machine.c
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> --- machine.c (revision 247792)
> +++ machine.c (working copy)
> @@ -797,7 +797,7 @@ format_next_process(caddr_t handle, char *(*get_us
> double pct;
> struct handle *hp;
> char status[16];
> - int state;
> + int cpu, state;
> struct rusage ru, *rup;
> long p_tot, s_tot;
> char *proc_fmt, thr_buf[6], jid_buf[6];
> @@ -997,6 +997,13 @@ format_next_process(caddr_t handle, char =
*(*get_us
> }
>=20
> /* format this entry */
> + if (smpmode) {
> + if (state =3D=3D SRUN && pp->ki_oncpu !=3D 0xff)
> + cpu =3D pp->ki_oncpu;
> + else
> + cpu =3D pp->ki_lastcpu;
> + } else
> + cpu =3D 0;
> proc_fmt =3D smpmode ? smp_Proc_format : up_Proc_format;
> if (ps.thread !=3D 0)
> thr_buf[0] =3D '\0';
> @@ -1014,7 +1021,7 @@ format_next_process(caddr_t handle, char =
*(*get_us
> format_k2(PROCSIZE(pp)),
> format_k2(pagetok(pp->ki_rssize)),
> status,
> - smpmode ? pp->ki_lastcpu : 0,
> + cpu,
> format_time(cputime),
> ps.wcpu ? 100.0 * weighted_cpu(pct, pp) : 100.0 * pct,
> screen_width > cmdlengthdelta ? screen_width - =
cmdlengthdelta : 0,
>=20
> --=20
> John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?580563A6-1C98-46E9-9B2E-3BC7FD262773>