lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 242-ac3 loop bug

--- Doug McNaught <doug@wireboard.com> wrote:
> Mark Swanson <swansma@yahoo.com> writes:
> > > ps -aux | grep loop
> > 1674 tty1 DW< 0:00 [loop0]
> >
> > The system is doing nothing to the loop filesystem.
> > Strange that the process isn't logging any cpu usage time. It's
> > definately responsible for the 1.00 load.
>
> It's just an artifact of the fact that processes in state D
> (uninterruptible sleep) are included in the load average calculation.
> Since the loop thread apparently sits in state D waiting for events
> on its device, you get a load average of 1 for each mounted loop
> device.

My thought was that the calculation seems to be misleading. The loop
process isn't taking up any CPU time. My applications are running
faster than ever. I'm guessing that ps (and /proc/loadavg) need to make
the distinction between:
1. uninterruptable sleep - where the process is blocking but taking
0CPU
2. uninterruptable sleep - I/O is happening using CPU

But I may not understand what uninterruptable sleep is supposed to
mean.

Take sendmail for example. Its default configuration for Linux won't
send attachments if the machine's load is too high. If I have 8 loop
devices in use and the load is at least 8, this may affect how sendmail
operates.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-
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/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:17    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans