| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4592cd09$0$339$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> Date: 27 Dec 2006 19:44:09 GMT From: Paul Slootman <paul+nospam@...tel.net> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: idle RAID1 cpu usage Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de> wrote: >On Dec 27 2006 19:09, Paul Slootman wrote: >> >>This works fine, but I noticed that quite some time was being used by >>the mdX_raid1 threads; even on a partition that's not even being used at >>this time... (it was an empty mounted filesystem, but I umounted it to >>be sure the filesystem code wasn't causing some IO). >> >>My question is: why is CPU being used by the RAID1 threads, even for >>those devices that are otherwise unused? What are they doing? > >First-time synchronization (if applies), otherwise I suspect some >housekeeping (bitmap perhaps?). No, I had rebooted after the initial synchronization was complete. >Otherwise it seems like a question who does what. On a raid5 array (i.e. >cpu-heavy), both smbd and mdx_raid5 accumulate time for, of course, xor >calculation. On those devices that are actually in use, I'd understand CPU being used; but where the device is not even mounted or used for swap or whatever, I find that amount of CPU usage very high for just checking the bitmap... I may take the idle device apart and reassemble without a bitmap to see whether that makes any difference. Paul Slootman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists