[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B29D9D6.9030702@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:12:22 +0300
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: minyard@....org, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@...fujitsu.com>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
OpenIPMI Developers <openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPMI: Add parameter to limit CPU usage in kipmid
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:23:54 -0600
> Corey Minyard <minyard@....org> wrote:
>
>> From: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@...fujitsu.com>
>>
>> In some cases kipmid can use a lot of CPU.
>
> Why is that? Without this information it is hard for others to suggest
> alternative implementations.
[picking up the thread from the middle]
I dunno why, but I can confirm that kipmid is one of the most
noticeable threads on all machines here running ipmid.
Here's an example from a machine with 20days uptime.
According to `ps -aflx', [kipmid] process took 30:34
sec of CPU time. Most close to that is [md6_raid1]
thread with 12:30, and next to that is [kjournald]
with 0:24. 30:34 is not exactly huge given 20days
uptime, but it is a clear "winner", far from the
most close competitor.
Different kernels, somewhat different hardware, but
the same behavour.
/mjt
--
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