From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May  7 20:03:55 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB6237B401
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed,  7 May 2003 20:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E9D643FAF
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed,  7 May 2003 20:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com)
Received: (from dan@localhost)
	by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h4833s5j026250;
	Wed, 7 May 2003 22:03:54 -0500 (CDT)
	(envelope-from dan)
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 22:03:54 -0500
From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
To: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com>
Message-ID: <20030508030354.GD31032@dan.emsphone.com>
References: <20030507181628.J30571@alpha.siliconlandmark.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030507181628.J30571@alpha.siliconlandmark.com>
X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT
X-message-flag: Outlook Error
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: High CPU utilization even with DMA enabled?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 03:03:56 -0000

In the last episode (May 07), Andre Guibert de Bruet said:
> Here's the output of top while moving a large file from one disk to
> another on my otherwise idle desktop machine:
> 
>   PID USERNAME    PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE  C   TIME   WCPU    CPU COMMAND
>    26 root        -68 -187     0K    12K WAIT   0 141:36 79.98% 79.98% irq7: dc0 ohci0

Is this line truncated?  If not, your CPU load is caused by either
your network card or your USB interface, not your file copy.

>    24 root        -64 -183     0K    12K WAIT   0   0:27  1.22%  1.22% irq15: ata1

> Now, I realize that copying a file from one disk to another requires cpu
> cycles even with DMA enabled, but is 80% of cpu usage to be expected?
> Also, wouldn't one expect process id 24 (irq15: ata1) to be using CPU
> during such transfers?

It is; I'd even call 1.22% cpu load a bit high, although I have no IDE
systems to compare it against.  All it's doing is DMA'ing data.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com