lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.0, loggings, cpu quotas, 2.1 issues, etc.
uOn Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Aaron Tiensivu wrote:

> > ***** Second, I would like to see some of the meter-0.2 or Portato code
> > integrated into kernel source and/or modules. This way, system status
> > lights could be updated by the kernel, without reading /proc or calling
> > uptime/ps/the like. This might be considered bloat, but that why it is
> > optional.
>
> I think this still belongs in "user-space-land".. that's a featurism that
> probably .5% of the Linux community uses and works well, in user-space.
>
> That's the main reason /proc is there, from what I can gather.. so you can
> write 'support' programs that can do exactly what 'Portato' or 'ps' does.

As of 1.3.73 (or around there) and up, running portato gives a very high
load in my opinion. Bloats my "xload" :) I stopped running it a few days
ago when I discovered that. I like the util otherwize, and if it could be
implemented somehow so that it doesnt use as much CPU time, I'd appreciate
it. I'd say the load rises by 0.2-0.5 when starting portato. When you "ps
-ux" it, or use "top", it doesnt show as using a lot of CPU, so I dont
know why the load averages go up as much.

Just seems to me it would benefit from being put into the interrupt
handler, and reading the load averages from within the kernel structures.
Would probably be just a few lines of code run every jiffy.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans