after upgrading from 2.6.16 to 2.6.27 kernel top shows a strange
picture of extremely highly %CPU values.
# top -V
top: procps version 3.2.6
# top
top - 04:24:06 up 7 days, 1:12, 1 user, load average: 2.28, 2.03, 2.00
Tasks: 183 total, 2 running, 181 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 36.2% us, 2.4% sy, 0.0% ni, 56.1% id, 4.7% wa, 0.1% hi, 0.5% si
Mem: 12473092k total, 11169060k used, 1304032k free, 16k buffers
Swap: 2048248k total, 636k used, 2047612k free, 1257988k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
19824 b 20 0 92212 17m 5420 S 4308 0.1 1:39.49 httpd
14396 b 20 0 92716 28m 16m S 3721 0.2 38:47.38 httpd
14024 b 20 0 92376 28m 16m S 2437 0.2 51:49.68 httpd
7415 b 20 0 96876 40m 24m D 2146 0.3 93:59.72 httpd
8182 b 20 0 94500 36m 21m S 1997 0.3 111:41.60 httpd
13461 b 20 0 94240 31m 17m S 1439 0.3 48:43.71 httpd
8466 b 20 0 92036 32m 21m S 1136 0.3 107:37.90 httpd
17620 b 20 0 92660 23m 11m S 1003 0.2 10:55.03 httpd
14025 b 20 0 92000 28m 16m S 720 0.2 51:49.49 httpd
3808 nobody 20 0 3013m 2.9g 592 S 714 24.7 343030:50 memcached
10 root 15 -5 0 0 0 S 714 0.0 11881:28 ksoftirqd/3
18487 b 20 0 91416 20m 9572 S 580 0.2 8:29.20 httpd
13252 b 20 0 93408 30m 17m S 580 0.3 45:19.69 httpd
17525 b 20 0 93208 23m 10m S 566 0.2 18:34.40 httpd
14760 b 20 0 93452 28m 15m S 534 0.2 57:34.65 httpd
3804 nobody 20 0 2995m 2.9g 592 S 441 24.6 378908:26 memcached
12209 b 20 0 92312 28m 16m S 279 0.2 63:28.45 httpd
%CPU is 4308 here and it's not the highest value.
i havent seen that on any previous kernel on the same server.
should i upgrade procps or downgrade kernel then to get proper values back? :)
or is it a feature of the new kernel?
thank you
2008/10/22 sbs <[email protected]>:
> after upgrading from 2.6.16 to 2.6.27 kernel top shows a strange
> picture of extremely highly %CPU values.
>
> # top -V
> top: procps version 3.2.6
>
>
> # top
> top - 04:24:06 up 7 days, 1:12, 1 user, load average: 2.28, 2.03, 2.00
> Tasks: 183 total, 2 running, 181 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu(s): 36.2% us, 2.4% sy, 0.0% ni, 56.1% id, 4.7% wa, 0.1% hi, 0.5% si
> Mem: 12473092k total, 11169060k used, 1304032k free, 16k buffers
> Swap: 2048248k total, 636k used, 2047612k free, 1257988k cached
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 19824 b 20 0 92212 17m 5420 S 4308 0.1 1:39.49 httpd
> 14396 b 20 0 92716 28m 16m S 3721 0.2 38:47.38 httpd
> 14024 b 20 0 92376 28m 16m S 2437 0.2 51:49.68 httpd
> 7415 b 20 0 96876 40m 24m D 2146 0.3 93:59.72 httpd
> 8182 b 20 0 94500 36m 21m S 1997 0.3 111:41.60 httpd
> 13461 b 20 0 94240 31m 17m S 1439 0.3 48:43.71 httpd
> 8466 b 20 0 92036 32m 21m S 1136 0.3 107:37.90 httpd
> 17620 b 20 0 92660 23m 11m S 1003 0.2 10:55.03 httpd
> 14025 b 20 0 92000 28m 16m S 720 0.2 51:49.49 httpd
> 3808 nobody 20 0 3013m 2.9g 592 S 714 24.7 343030:50 memcached
> 10 root 15 -5 0 0 0 S 714 0.0 11881:28 ksoftirqd/3
> 18487 b 20 0 91416 20m 9572 S 580 0.2 8:29.20 httpd
> 13252 b 20 0 93408 30m 17m S 580 0.3 45:19.69 httpd
> 17525 b 20 0 93208 23m 10m S 566 0.2 18:34.40 httpd
> 14760 b 20 0 93452 28m 15m S 534 0.2 57:34.65 httpd
> 3804 nobody 20 0 2995m 2.9g 592 S 441 24.6 378908:26 memcached
> 12209 b 20 0 92312 28m 16m S 279 0.2 63:28.45 httpd
>
>
>
> %CPU is 4308 here and it's not the highest value.
> i havent seen that on any previous kernel on the same server.
>
> should i upgrade procps or downgrade kernel then to get proper values back? :)
> or is it a feature of the new kernel?
>
> thank you
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
Hi,
It really depends on what your box is doing at the time you capture
the cpu usage.
And it really depends too of your kernel config...
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Frédéric Weisbecker <[email protected]> wrote:> 2008/10/22 sbs <[email protected]>:>> after upgrading from 2.6.16 to 2.6.27 kernel top shows a strange>> picture of extremely highly %CPU values.>>>> # top -V>> top: procps version 3.2.6>>>>>> # top>> top - 04:24:06 up 7 days, 1:12, 1 user, load average: 2.28, 2.03, 2.00>> Tasks: 183 total, 2 running, 181 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie>> Cpu(s): 36.2% us, 2.4% sy, 0.0% ni, 56.1% id, 4.7% wa, 0.1% hi, 0.5% si>> Mem: 12473092k total, 11169060k used, 1304032k free, 16k buffers>> Swap: 2048248k total, 636k used, 2047612k free, 1257988k cached>>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND>> 19824 b 20 0 92212 17m 5420 S 4308 0.1 1:39.49 httpd>> 14396 b 20 0 92716 28m 16m S 3721 0.2 38:47.38 httpd>> 14024 b 20 0 92376 28m 16m S 2437 0.2 51:49.68 httpd>> 7415 b 20 0 96876 40m 24m D 2146 0.3 93:59.72 httpd>> 8182 b 20 0 94500 36m 21m S 1997 0.3 111:41.60 httpd>> 13461 b 20 0 94240 31m 17m S 1439 0.3 48:43.71 httpd>> 8466 b 20 0 92036 32m 21m S 1136 0.3 107:37.90 httpd>> 17620 b 20 0 92660 23m 11m S 1003 0.2 10:55.03 httpd>> 14025 b 20 0 92000 28m 16m S 720 0.2 51:49.49 httpd>> 3808 nobody 20 0 3013m 2.9g 592 S 714 24.7 343030:50 memcached>> 10 root 15 -5 0 0 0 S 714 0.0 11881:28 ksoftirqd/3>> 18487 b 20 0 91416 20m 9572 S 580 0.2 8:29.20 httpd>> 13252 b 20 0 93408 30m 17m S 580 0.3 45:19.69 httpd>> 17525 b 20 0 93208 23m 10m S 566 0.2 18:34.40 httpd>> 14760 b 20 0 93452 28m 15m S 534 0.2 57:34.65 httpd>> 3804 nobody 20 0 2995m 2.9g 592 S 441 24.6 378908:26 memcached>> 12209 b 20 0 92312 28m 16m S 279 0.2 63:28.45 httpd>>>>>>>> %CPU is 4308 here and it's not the highest value.>> i havent seen that on any previous kernel on the same server.>>>> should i upgrade procps or downgrade kernel then to get proper values back? :)>> or is it a feature of the new kernel?>>>> thank you>>>> Hi,>> It really depends on what your box is doing at the time you capture> the cpu usage.> And it really depends too of your kernel config...
It really shouldn't, we're talking about /proc which is supposed to bea stable userspace interface.
Try upgrading your procps, there's a chance it's just so ancient thatit accidentally got broken. However, if that fixes your problem, thenplease report back with a subject line of "/proc API breakage" orsomesuch, to get the proper attention to the issue.????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay? ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?
On Wednesday 22 October 2008 23:40:54 Ray Lee wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <[email protected]>
wrote:
> > 2008/10/22 sbs <[email protected]>:
[snip]
> >> should i upgrade procps or downgrade kernel then to get proper values
> >> back? :) or is it a feature of the new kernel?
> >>
> >> thank you
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It really depends on what your box is doing at the time you capture
> > the cpu usage.
> > And it really depends too of your kernel config...
>
> It really shouldn't, we're talking about /proc which is supposed to be
> a stable userspace interface.
>
> Try upgrading your procps, there's a chance it's just so ancient that
> it accidentally got broken. However, if that fixes your problem, then
> please report back with a subject line of "/proc API breakage" or
> somesuch, to get the proper attention to the issue.
This is a known kernel bug that for some reason wasn't fixed before 2.6.27 was
released. See http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11209 for details.
It would probably be useful if the OP added himself to the CC list, so Peter
can get some more details about the box.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
thank you
will be waiting until it gets fixed
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Alistair John Strachan
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 October 2008 23:40:54 Ray Lee wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> > 2008/10/22 sbs <[email protected]>:
> [snip]
>> >> should i upgrade procps or downgrade kernel then to get proper values
>> >> back? :) or is it a feature of the new kernel?
>> >>
>> >> thank you
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > It really depends on what your box is doing at the time you capture
>> > the cpu usage.
>> > And it really depends too of your kernel config...
>>
>> It really shouldn't, we're talking about /proc which is supposed to be
>> a stable userspace interface.
>>
>> Try upgrading your procps, there's a chance it's just so ancient that
>> it accidentally got broken. However, if that fixes your problem, then
>> please report back with a subject line of "/proc API breakage" or
>> somesuch, to get the proper attention to the issue.
>
> This is a known kernel bug that for some reason wasn't fixed before 2.6.27 was
> released. See http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11209 for details.
>
> It would probably be useful if the OP added himself to the CC list, so Peter
> can get some more details about the box.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Alistair.
>