From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 20 02:37:32 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79337171741 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 02:37:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net) Received: from smtp.vangyzen.net (static-74-41-215-198.dr01.brvl.mn.frontiernet.net [74.41.215.198]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E7813C47E for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2007 02:37:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net) Received: from [10.1.1.2] (fenchurch.vangyzen.net [10.1.1.2]) by smtp.vangyzen.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A9522836 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:15:54 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <45DA59DA.3040408@vangyzen.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:15:54 -0600 From: Eric van Gyzen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: ath(4) irq and taskq cpu usage X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 02:37:32 -0000 The irq and taskq for my ath(4) card often use excessive amounts of CPU time, even when my network is idle. They are often above 10% and 15%, respectively; occasionally, they are as high as 27% and 44%. The system is an AMD Athlon64 2800+ running FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE i386 with a custom kernel including the wlan_* stuff, ath, ath_hal, and ath_rate_sample. It is a station using WPA2-PSK with AES-CCMP. The access point is also a FreeBSD machine with an ath(4) card. During periods of high CPU usage, the rx failed 'cuz of PHY err OFDM timing fields of the athstats output are increasing rather quickly. For example, while CPU usage was 25% and 46%, the OFDM timing field was increasing by 43,000 per second. Can anyone explain this? Is it a sign of failing hardware? Thanks, Eric