| 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: <50612467.5030700@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:26:31 +0800 From: Charles Wang <0oo0.hust@...il.com> To: Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: Load averages? The HZ you configured is 100, and cs is 350+ per second, so there will be 3.5cs per tick. This may cause loadavg caculation not correctly. This problem was discussed in the following link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/12/130 If your kernel alread has Peter's latest fix patch sched/nohz: Rewrite and fix load-avg computation -- again Then maybe this problem is caused by not fully applied for Peter's patch. Try the following patch please [PATCH] sched: add missing call for calc_load_exit_idle https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/20/142 On 09/25/2012 05:39 AM, Russell King wrote: > I have here a cubox running v3.5, and I've been watching top while it's > playing back an mpeg stream from NFS using vlc. rootfs on SD card, and > it's uniprocessor. > > Top reports the following: > > top - 20:38:35 up 44 min, 3 users, load average: 1.26, 1.10, 1.10 > Tasks: 125 total, 1 running, 124 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu(s): 55.0%us, 3.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 40.8%id, 0.0%wa, 0.7%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st > Mem: 768892k total, 757900k used, 10992k free, 37080k buffers > Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 505940k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 4270 cubox 20 0 244m 68m 38m S 51.3 9.2 18:33.32 vlc > 3659 root 20 0 57652 40m 35m S 6.5 5.4 3:06.79 Xorg > > and it stays fairly constant like that - around 55-60% user ticks > around 2-4% system, 40% idle, 0% wait, and around a total of 1% > interrupt (combined hardware/software). Here's another snapshot: > > top - 20:41:58 up 47 min, 3 users, load average: 0.93, 1.04, 1.07 > Tasks: 125 total, 1 running, 124 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu(s): 59.8%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 38.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.3%hi, 0.3%si, 0.0%st > Mem: 768892k total, 755296k used, 13596k free, 37080k buffers > Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 503856k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 4270 cubox 20 0 243m 68m 38m S 53.6 9.1 20:19.74 vlc > 3659 root 20 0 57652 40m 35m S 6.5 5.4 3:20.50 Xorg > > Now, for this capture, I've set top's interval to be 60 seconds: > > top - 20:49:52 up 55 min, 3 users, load average: 0.99, 0.96, 1.01 > Tasks: 125 total, 1 running, 124 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu(s): 60.4%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 36.6%id, 0.1%wa, 0.5%hi, 0.8%si, 0.0%st > Mem: 768892k total, 759816k used, 9076k free, 37076k buffers > Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 508340k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 4270 cubox 20 0 244m 68m 38m S 54.7 9.2 24:23.46 vlc > 3659 root 20 0 57652 40m 35m S 4.6 5.4 4:02.80 Xorg > > And finally, here's what vmstat 5 looks like: > > procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- > r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa > 0 0 0 13788 37164 503380 0 0 62 13 472 444 52 5 33 9 > 0 0 0 13416 37164 504340 0 0 0 0 354 344 62 2 37 0 > 1 0 0 12424 37164 505300 0 0 0 0 356 374 61 3 36 0 > 4 0 0 11556 37164 506260 0 0 0 0 357 360 63 2 35 0 > 1 0 0 10564 37164 507220 0 0 0 1 359 358 56 4 41 0 > 0 0 0 9572 37164 508180 0 0 0 0 349 369 57 3 41 0 > 0 0 0 11628 37164 505368 0 0 0 0 356 350 56 4 41 0 > 2 0 0 11432 37164 506328 0 0 0 0 350 372 57 3 40 0 > 0 0 0 10440 37164 507288 0 0 0 0 351 379 57 3 40 0 > 0 0 0 9448 37164 508248 0 0 0 0 342 348 57 2 41 0 > 0 0 0 12248 37156 504804 0 0 0 0 356 381 60 3 37 0 > 0 0 0 12052 37156 505764 0 0 0 0 354 365 61 3 36 0 > 1 0 0 12052 37156 505764 0 0 0 0 226 326 56 2 42 0 > 0 0 0 11060 37156 506724 0 0 0 0 352 355 54 5 42 0 > 0 0 0 10068 37156 507684 0 0 0 0 357 356 58 3 38 0 > 0 0 0 9076 37156 508644 0 0 0 0 351 356 64 3 33 0 > > Yet, for some reason, the load average sits around 0.9-1.3. I don't > understand this - if processes are only running for around 65% of the > time and there's very little waiting for IO, why should the load > average be saying that the system load is equivalent to 1 process > running for 1minute/5minutes/15minutes? > > I've also seen a situation where vlc has been using close to 90% > CPU, plays flawlessly, yet the load average reports as 1.5 - if the > load average is more than 1, then that should mean there is > insufficient system bandwidth to sustain the running jobs in real > time (because its saying that there's 1.5 processes running > continuously over 1 minute, and as there's only one CPU...) > > The behaviour I'm seeing from the kernel's load average calculation > just seems wrong. > > Config which may be related: > > CONFIG_HZ=100 > CONFIG_NO_HZ=y > CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=y, > CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y > CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED=y > CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH=y > CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED=y > # CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP is not set > > Reading the comments before get_avenrun(), I've tried disabling NO_HZ, > and I wouldn't say it's had too much effect. The following top is with > NO_HZ disabled: > > top - 22:11:00 up 16 min, 2 users, load average: 0.84, 1.04, 0.91 > Tasks: 120 total, 1 running, 119 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu(s): 52.8%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 42.7%id, 3.3%wa, 0.7%hi, 0.3%si, 0.0%st > Mem: 768900k total, 622984k used, 145916k free, 29196k buffers > Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 399248k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 4332 cubox 20 0 235m 52m 34m S 48.9 7.0 4:38.32 vlc > 3667 root 20 0 56000 35m 31m S 6.8 4.8 0:43.32 Xorg > 4347 root 20 0 2276 1144 764 R 1.0 0.1 0:05.36 top > > What I do notice with NO_HZ=n is that the 1min load average seems to be > a little more responsive to load changes. > > Any ideas or explanations about the apparantly higher than real load > average figures? > -- 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