Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265558AbUANK2M (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 05:28:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265461AbUANK2M (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 05:28:12 -0500 Received: from denise.shiny.it ([194.20.232.1]:37031 "EHLO denise.shiny.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265439AbUANK1y (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2004 05:27:54 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:27:51 +0100 (CET) From: Giuliano Pochini To: Haakon Riiser cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Busy-wait delay in qmail 1.03 after upgrading to Linux 2.6 In-Reply-To: <20040113234611.GA558@s.chello.no> Message-ID: References: <20040113210923.GA955@s.chello.no> <20040113135152.3ed26b85.akpm@osdl.org> <20040113232624.GA302@s.chello.no> <20040113234611.GA558@s.chello.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 776 Lines: 21 On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Haakon Riiser wrote: > For example, another problem I encountered while > upgrading to 2.6 was that disk intensive jobs, such as updating > the slocate database, made ascpu report 100% CPU usage. I just > ran top (procps 2.0.16) beside it, and it reported approximately > 10% CPU usage, which is no more than 2.4 used. It makes sense, since HZ is 10 times higher in 2.6. Did you recompile ascpu ? Check if ascpu assumes HZ is 100. In that case it may overstimate the cpu time by a factor 10. -- Giuliano. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/