Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263015AbUDECMm (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 22:12:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263033AbUDECMm (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 22:12:42 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([216.238.38.203]:57100 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263015AbUDECMj (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 22:12:39 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Path: not-for-mail From: Bill Davidsen Newsgroups: mail.linux-kernel Subject: Re: 2.6.4 : 100% CPU use on EIDE disk operarion, VIA chipset Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 22:14:57 -0400 Organization: TMR Associates, Inc Message-ID: References: <406FC621.1090507@A88da.a.pppool.de> <1081108674.1072.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: gatekeeper.tmr.com 1081131031 1875 192.168.12.10 (5 Apr 2004 02:10:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@tmr.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <1081108674.1072.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1579 Lines: 36 Mikhail Ramendik wrote: > Hello, > > Andreas Hartmann wrote: > >>>As recommended there, I have tried 2.6.5-rc3-mm4. >>> >>>No change. Still 100% CPU usage; the performance seems teh same. >> >>Yes. But it's curious: >>Take a tar-file, e.g. tar the compiled 2.6 kernel directory. Than, untar >>it again - the machine behaves total normaly. > > > Not really. I tried a "simple" tar (no gzib/bzip2) - it was the same as > with cp, a near-100% CPU "system" load, most of it iowait. ??? was it in system or wait-io? One or the other, if you can't tell the difference update your tools, see what's really happening. > > If I use bzip2 with tar, then yes, the load is nearly 100% "user", > actually it's bzip2. But this is because the disk i/o is done at a *far* > slower rate; the bottleneck is the CPU. If we don't read (or write) the > disk heavily, naturally the system/iowait load is low. > > I tried doing a "cp" in another xterm window, while the tar/bzip2 was > running. And sure enough, up the CPU system/iowait usage goes - the > "cp"'s disk i/o takes much of the CPU time away from the bz2 task! Looks > exactly like a cause of performance problems. > > (All of this was done on 2.6.5-rc3-mm4). -- bill davidsen CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979 - 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/