Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.6.4 : 100% CPU use on EIDE disk operarion, VIA chipset | From | Mikhail Ramendik <> | Date | Sat, 03 Apr 2004 18:12:05 +0400 |
| |
Hello,
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> > It turned out that on disk-intensive operation, the "system" CPU usage > > skyrockets. With a mere "cp" of a large file to the same direstory > > (tested with ext3fs and FAT32 file systems), it is 100% practically all > > of the time ! > > Which tool do you use for measure? xosview?
IceWM's monitor. (It just runs all the time, that's how I spotted the problem).
> I'm having here the same problem. But it depends on the tool which is used > for measuring. If I use top from procps 3.2, I can't see this high system > load. "time" can't see it, too. > > This is what top says during cp of 512MB-file: > Cpu(s): 2.0% us, 8.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 89.0% wa, 0.7% hi, 0.0% si
I don't have procps 3.2 as yet, will compile it soon; however I think it's the same issue.
I tried the deadline elevator, as suggested by Bill Davidsen down this thread. It did not help. In fact the performance fell (the same file took a longer time to copy); the CPU use is still 100% (with an occasional "dent" or two, but these are very small in duration).
I also tried increasing the read-ahead. It does not help either.
Finally I tried increasing the read-ahead WITH the deadline elevator. The performance rose (compared to the one measured with the standard read-ahead and the deadline elevator). And the CPU load still did not change.
I don't have much CPU to waste (Duron 650 MHz), so I think some performance problems I see are linked to this.
> But you're right, 2.6.4 is slower than 2.4.25. See the thread "Very poor > performance with 2.6.4" here in the list.
I've looked at it. I will try the latest rc-mm kernel and report the results.
Yours, Mikhail Ramendik
- 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/
| |