Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <balbir@...>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, <stable@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - 6:11 am

On Tuesday 16 October 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:

I only remembered stime going backwards, but looking back at the mails
you are right, there has been one case of utime going backwards too.
stime going backwards happens _much_ more frequently.


I can reproduce the problem reliably for two KDE programs I have running
permanently on my system: kontact and amarok. Both of these wake up
regularly and use some (not very much) processor capacity before going to
sleep again. Any process that has that that characteristic should do.

/me thinks a bit and tries something

lol - I have just managed to reproduce this with 'top' itself :-P

Run 'top' in one terminal; then in another terminal:
$ ps ax | grep " [t]op"
17869 pts/0    S+     0:00 top
$ while true; do awk '{print $14" "$15}' /proc/17869/stat; sleep 1; done | ts
[...]
Oct 16 11:54:48 8 10
Oct 16 11:54:49 6 12  <-- utime
Oct 16 11:54:50 6 12
Oct 16 11:54:51 6 12
Oct 16 11:54:52 8 10  <-- stime
Oct 16 11:54:53 8 10
Oct 16 11:54:54 8 10
Oct 16 11:54:55 8 12
Oct 16 11:54:56 8 12

This example happens to have both stime _and_ utime decreasing...

'ts' is a small utility that prints the timestamps before the readings;
the test will work just as well without it.
Note that it may take a while for the error to show up. In this case it
was 40 seconds.

Cheers,
Frans Pop
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Frans Pop, (Fri Oct 12, 4:31 pm)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Christian Borntraeger, (Sun Oct 14, 4:36 pm)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Christian Borntraeger, (Tue Oct 16, 4:29 am)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Christian Borntraeger, (Tue Oct 16, 6:34 am)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Christian Borntraeger, (Tue Oct 30, 1:56 am)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Christian Borntraeger, (Mon Oct 29, 4:33 pm)
Re: [stable] 2.6.23 regression: top displaying 9999% CPU usage, Frans Pop, (Tue Oct 16, 6:11 am)