Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 11:11:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 11:11:48 -0400 Received: from mail.inup.com ([194.250.46.226]:26635 "EHLO mailhost.lineo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 11:11:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 17:15:42 +0200 From: christophe barbe To: Paul Jakma Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: uninteruptable sleep (D state => load_avrg++) Message-ID: <20010404171542.A14461@pc8.inup.com> In-Reply-To: <20010404164858.A14009@pc8.inup.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: ; from paulj@itg.ie on mer, avr 04, 2001 at 17:05:05 +0200 X-Mailer: Balsa 1.1.0 Lines: 27 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On mer, 04 avr 2001 17:05:05 Paul Jakma wrote: > imagine a box with a bunch of processes that do almost nothing but > call on the kernel to do IO. If you only count the runnable state > towards load_avg then your load_avg will be very low, even though your > box is swamped - you are ignoring the work of the kernel. > > if you count D towards load_avg then it will reflect this abstract > 'load' concept more accurately. > > Ie, counting D towards load_avg is a way of taking kernel IO work into > account when calculating the load average figures. ok I'm convinced. And a measure can't be perfect. Thank you, Christophe -- Christophe Barb? Software Engineer Lineo High Availability Group 42-46, rue M?d?ric 92110 Clichy - France phone (33).1.41.40.02.12 fax (33).1.41.40.02.01 www.lineo.com - 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/