Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:40:12 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Slawek Zak <zaks@prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Deadlocks with recent SMP current Message-ID: <20040816184012.GK73391@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <86y8kfqcp8.fsf@thirst.unx.era.pl> References: <20040813121208.M31181@cvs.imp.ch> <86y8kfqcp8.fsf@thirst.unx.era.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Aug 16), Slawek Zak said: > Another thing is bothering me. In top I see: > > CPU states: 16.2% user, 0.0% nice, 2.5% system, 1.0% interrupt, 80.3% idle > Mem: 254M Active, 605M Inact, 254M Wired, 16K Cache, 112M Buf, 2622M Free > Swap: 4096M Total, 4096M Free > > PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND > 37033 mysql 20 0 265M 178M kserel 0 610:59 124.37% 124.37% mysqld > > MySQLd is running with libpthread and can go up to 400% without > significantly afecting the idle percentage shown by top. I don't see > how I could fit 400% into 20% on those two suckers, therefore I ask > :) The CPU accounting for KSE threads is a bit inaccurate; new threads inherit the CPU usage of their parent, so if a program does a lot of computation, then spawns a bunch of threads, you would end up with 50 threads each with 90% cpu. Top then totals them all up :) I don't know if it's possible to accurately display per-thread CPU usage in a M:N threading scheme. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040816184012.GK73391>