Messages in this thread |  | | | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] procps 3.0.4 | | Date | Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:01:11 -0400 (EDT) |
| |
Rik van Riel writes: > On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>>> Can you be more specific? What bugs do you see? >> >> There isn't error checking in the five_cpu_numbers function >> to detect bad data. Not that bad data should ever happen; there >> is a bug in the WOLK kernel. > > Guess why the iowait stats are initialised to 0 ? ;) > > We know that user, system, nice and idle are present > in every kernel and we bail out with an error if we > get less than 4 values for the CPU stats.
The problem is not at all related to the IO-wait addition, and no you don't bail out with an error... procps 3 does bail out, elsewhere, causing the mistaken belief that procps 2 runs correctly on a WOLK kernel. That's wrong; no procps runs correctly on a WOLK kernel.
I mentioned the issue merely to avoid bogus bug reports. I don't want WOLK kernel users claiming that procps 2 works and procps 3 not; the truth is that neither one can work on a WOLK kernel.
>> I could make vmstat way faster if the kernel would provide the >> number of tasks that are running, swapped out, blocked, etc. > > I sent in a patch for that. I'll resend when Linus returns > from holidays.
Great.
jim.houston@attbi.com seems to have most of a patch for the %CPU problem. (tracking the data, but not reporting it)
What about /proc/*/tty, an adopted-child flag, something for the kapmd-idle problem, /proc/*/threads/* files, etc. ? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |