Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 23:49:32 -0500 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Core Duo - only one cpu being used Message-ID: <445AD95C.7040802@centtech.com> In-Reply-To: <445AD83A.7090607@samsco.org> References: <445AB56F.8090907@centtech.com> <445AC174.5050102@pacific.net.sg> <445AC46F.30702@centtech.com> <445AD048.80305@pacific.net.sg> <445AD1AC.1070902@centtech.com> <445AD300.1020808@pacific.net.sg> <445AD50B.2060107@centtech.com> <445AD6B4.7050407@pacific.net.sg> <445AD83A.7090607@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > Erich Dollansky wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Eric Anderson wrote: >> >>> Erich Dollansky wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Eric Anderson wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU >>>>> COMMAND >>>>> 11 root 1 171 52 0K 8K CPU1 0 0:00 99.02% >>>>> idle: cpu1 >>>>> 2653 root 1 128 0 18564K 17560K RUN 0 0:01 34.00% >>>>> cc1plus >>>> >>>> >>>> could it be that it is just a problem with top itself? >>>> >>>> It cannot be that CPU1 uses 99% for the idle process and 34% for the >>>> compiler. >>>> >>>> Play with the other sort options. You might find the the idle >>>> process for CPU0. >>> >>> >>> Is this what you want: >>> >>> $ ps -auxw | grep idle >>> root 11 99.0 0.0 0 8 ?? RL 7:45PM 0:00.00 >>> [idle: cpu1] >>> root 12 0.0 0.0 0 8 ?? RL 7:45PM 51:04.57 >>> [idle: cpu0] >>> >> something is really wrong here. CPU1 gets 99% of the time but uses >> then only 0 seconds while CPU0 gets 0% of the time but uses 51 hours? > > CPU1 is being treated as a hyperthreading core instead of a real core, > and is being disabled per our policy on Intel hyperthreading. By > 'disabled' I mean that it is started, but it is being excluded from > scheduling decisions, and thus is only running its idle proc. It's > also handling any interrupts that come to it, such as timer and IPI > interrupts, so it's at 99% instead of 100% for the idle proc. There > is nothing broken about the number you are seeing, your system is > just running under a scheduling policy that it should not be. > > This should have been fixed a week or so ago by a commit to HEAD, > RELENG_6, and RELENG_6_1 by Colin Percival. How old is kernel? 6.1-RC FreeBSD 6.1-RC #13: Thu Apr 27 08:33:14 CDT 2006 So I probably just missed it. I'll rebuilt and try it tomorrow morning, and report back. Thanks for all the help and a good description. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?445AD95C.7040802>