Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 08:52:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 08:52:32 -0400 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:43533 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 08:52:21 -0400 Subject: Re: uninteruptable sleep (D state => load_avrg++) To: christophe.barbe@lineo.fr (christophe barbe) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 13:53:34 +0100 (BST) Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010404141349.A6702@pc8.inup.com> from "christophe barbe" at Apr 04, 2001 02:13:49 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The sleep should certainly be interruptible and I that's what I said to t= > he GFS guy. > But what the reason to increment the load average for each D process ? D indicates short term I/O wait. This is how unix has always computed the laod average. - 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/