From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Jan 26 5:13:43 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DB937B401 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 05:13:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from sydney.lemis.com (sydney.lemis.com [192.109.197.199]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA18C43F13 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 05:13:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from grog@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com) Received: from sydney.worldwide.lemis.com (smmsp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sydney.lemis.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0QDCGJS001044; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:13:12 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from grog@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com) Received: (from grog@localhost) by sydney.worldwide.lemis.com (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0Q8HD7f001928; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:17:13 +0800 (WST) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:17:13 +0800 From: Greg Lehey To: Kris Kennaway Cc: nate , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE in VMware Message-ID: <20030126081713.GF1606@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com> References: <000901c2c469$8c9e4cf0$0a00a8c0@michaelslaptop> <38719.10.10.10.7.1043538258.squirrel@webmail.linuxpowered.net> <20030126013639.GA16435@rot13.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030126013639.GA16435@rot13.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 9A1B 8202 BCCE B846 F92F 09AC 22E6 F290 507A 4223 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Saturday, 25 January 2003 at 17:36:39 -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 03:44:18PM -0800, nate wrote: >> Michael Ritchie said: >>> Not sure if this should be in -QUESTIONS or a report to VMware themselves, >>> but when attempting to run FreeBSD 5 within VMware Workstation 3.2 on a >>> Windows XP Pro host, the CPU usage sits at 100% -- whether there are any >>> processes undertaking heavy processing or not. The host PC is a 1.7GHz >>> P4, with 512MB RAM, so there shouldn't be any problems. It takes about 2 >>> minutes for 'man man' to bring up a page. 4.6.2 and 4.7 both work GREAT, >>> even in X. >>> >>> Any thoughts on why this might be the case?? >> >> this is symtomatic of the guest OS(freebsd in this case) not having >> advanced power management features enabled. > > No, it's symptomatic of VMWARE emulating a certain CPU opcode (used in > FreeBSD 5.0 for locking primitives) very inefficiently. See my > previous response. Until proof of the contrary, I'd assume its because FreeBSD 5.0 has an idle process to use up the rest of the CPU time. This is a feature, not a bug :-) Here's my laptop: last pid: 1919; load averages: 0.01, 0.02, 0.00 up 0+02:06:58 16:14:52 100 processes: 2 running, 87 sleeping, 11 waiting CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 99.2% idle Mem: 78M Active, 14M Inact, 17M Wired, 4636K Cache, 22M Buf, 6328K Free Swap: 512M Total, 5924K Used, 506M Free, 1% Inuse PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 11 root -16 0 0K 12K RUN 124:14 97.56% 97.56% idle 740 grog 96 0 45904K 44356K select 0:34 0.00% 0.00% XFree86 962 grog 96 0 12356K 9920K select 0:23 0.00% 0.00% emacs Note that the system is 99% idle, but the idle process is using 97% of CPU time. The discrepancy is due to different ways of smoothing in the usage calculations. You'll note that the idle process' CPU time is pretty close to the uptime. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message