i am seeing the same problem on 11.10
please see here my description
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11612057
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
Title:
[karmic] CPU load
This bug was fixed in the package linux - 2.6.31-22.68
---
linux (2.6.31-22.68) karmic-proposed; urgency=low
[ Andy Whitcroft ]
* SAUCE: docs -- fix doc strings for fc_event_seq
[ Brad Figg ]
* SAUCE: (no-up) Modularize vesafb -- fix initialization
- LP: #611471
[ Ch
** Tags added: verification-done
** Tags removed: verification-needed
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
Accepted linux into karmic-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
** Tags removed: verification-done
** Ta
SRU verification for Karmic:
I have reproduced the problem with linux 2.6.31-22.65 in karmic-updates and
have verified that the version of linux 2.6.31-22.66 in -proposed fixes the
issue. I've been using Chase's testcase and the load average is reported
correctly.
Marking as verification-done
$ apt-cache policy linux-image-generic
linux-image-generic:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: 2.6.31.22.35
Version table:
2.6.31.22.35 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic-updates/main Packages
500 http://security.ubuntu.com karmic-security/main Packages
A customer was pro
@Peter, thanks for testing that's much appreciated. Did you test the package in
-proposed ?
What's the output of apt-cache policy linux-image-2.6.31-22-generic ?
Could you try to reproduce the load you initially reported and tell us
if the kernel in -proposed fixes it
Thanks in advance for your
Installed. Looks normal. I didn't test any specific load however.
$ apt-cache policy linux-image-virtual
linux-image-virtual:
Installed: 2.6.31.22.35
Candidate: 2.6.31.22.35
Version table:
*** 2.6.31.22.35 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic-updates/main Packages
500 h
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/karmic-proposed/linux-mvl-dove
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/karmic-proposed/linux-ec2
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscrib
Accepted linux into karmic-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
** Tags added: verification-needed
--
[
Currently in karmic-proposed unapproved queue, awaiting approval from
ubuntu-sru
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs ma
Currently in karmic-proposed, awaiting approval from ubuntu-sru
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/lucid-proposed/linux-qcm-msm
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@l
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs ma
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/linux-ec2
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
htt
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/linux-mvl-dove
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.co
This bug was fixed in the package linux - 2.6.32-20.29
---
linux (2.6.32-20.29) lucid; urgency=low
[ Andy Whitcroft ]
* Revert "SAUCE: Use MODULE_IMPORT macro to tie intel_agp to i915"
- LP: #542251
* add Breaks: against hardy lvm2
- LP: #528155
[ Colin Watson ]
*
I accidentally nominated this for jaunty by mistake. Please ignore.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ub
** Patch added:
"0001-sched-update-load-count-only-once-per-cpu-in-10-tick.patch"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43572916/0001-sched-update-load-count-only-once-per-cpu-in-10-tick.patch
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Milestone: None => karmic-updates
--
[karmic] CPU load not being
** Attachment added: "testcase"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43572858/testcase
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
Stable Release Update Justification:
Impact of bug: On low load systems with specific work load
characteristics the load average may not be representative of the real
load. Given a specific test case it is possible to load a system with
NR_CPUS number of tasks and yet have a load avg of 0.00, thou
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Karmic)
Importance: Undecided => Low
Spoke to tgabi. The kernel is reporting fine.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubunt
@tgabi:
Can you be more specific? If things are working correctly, then great.
Otherwise, I'll need more information.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is sub
Looks much better, although little bit weird in the way it rises/falls.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing lis
@tgabi:
Sorry for the false alarm. I had an incorrect patch laying around, but
the correct patch should be in the kernel I listed above. I also tested
the patch against a test program I have attached. Without the patch, the
test program will ensure at least 90% processor usage, but I have
confirme
@tgabi:
I've done some testing of my own, and I don't think the ~defer1 kernel
is working properly. Let me work some more on the fix.
Thanks
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of U
@tgabi:
I've uploaded a new kernel to
http://people.canonical.com/~cndougla/513848/linux-
image-2.6.31-21-server_2.6.31-21.58~defer1_amd64.deb. This kernel defers
any task accounting that occurs during the 10 tick load avg update
window until the next accounting done by any cpu after the 10 tick
w
@tgabi:
This latest log confirms my theory. There are only two situations where
the calc_load_tasks counter is incremented: once when each process
updates the counter every 5 seconds, and when a processor switches from
an uninterruptible task to the idle task. The first increment is always
matched
** Attachment added: "tested with : 2.6.31-21-server #58 SMP Thu Mar 18
16:04:20 UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41306357/test2-dmesg.bz2
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification beca
@tgabi:
I've uploaded a new test kernel to
http://people.canonical.com/~cndougla/513848/linux-
image-2.6.31-21-server_2.6.31-21.58~printk2_amd64.deb. This kernel will
print out each time the calc_load_tasks counter is changed between the
time each cpu increments it to represent the running process
@tgabi:
I found that the calc_load_tasks counter is updated in two areas: once
every 5 seconds before the load avg is calculated, and every time a cpu
enters the idle task. The latter occurs very frequently if the system
isn't loaded very much, which seems to be the case for your server.
Every tim
Tomcat is using a large number of java threads.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubun
The good news is that the dstat matches up perfectly with the
calc_load_tasks values in dmesg, so we know that the issue is confined
to calc_load_tasks not being representative of the number of running
processes in the system.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launch
@tgabi:
In the log you just posted there seems to be way too many running tasks
that are never accounted for in calc_load_tasks. I will try to figure
out a reasonable way to debug what is going on.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You rece
@tgabi:
calc_load_tasks is an integer [1]. It basically represents the latest
data point used for load avg calculation and is only updated once by
each cpu every 5 seconds.
[1] http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.33/kernel/sched.c#L2997
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs
** Attachment added: "Longer running dstat"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41245656/test1-dstat.bz2
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubunt
** Attachment added: "Longer running dmesg"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41245612/test1-dmesg.bz2
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubunt
Well, unless the calc_load_tasks is integer it still doesn't make sense.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing li
@tgabi:
The two printouts are somewhat imprecise. The calc_load_tasks value is
the exact value used for calculating the load avg you see in user space.
I printed out the nr_running and nr_uninterruptible counts just for
information.
The difference here is that the nr_* counts are the counts at th
I've uploaded a -server kernel to
http://people.canonical.com/~cndougla/513848 for testing.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubu
I'll redo the test shortly. However is puzzling looking at something
like this:
Mar 18 11:20:50 web41 kernel: [ 2059.210041] calc_global_load:3014 cpu: 0,
nr_running: 2, nr_uninterruptible: 84
Mar 18 11:20:50 web41 kernel: [ 2059.210044] calc_global_load:3014 cpu: 1,
nr_running: 0, nr_uninterrup
@tgabi:
Sorry about the kernel type, I should have built a -server kernel for
you. However, there shouldn't be any process statistics differences
between -server and -generic kernels.
Thanks for the logging output. Unfortunately the dmstat output doesn't
have any timestamps associated with it. Pl
** Attachment added: "tested with : 2.6.31-21-generic #58 SMP Tue Mar 16
18:24:55 UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41228713/test-kernel-result1.txt
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notific
Is that a desktop kernel ? I'm going to test anyway, but there may be
differences
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs m
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => In Progress
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
I have uploaded a test kernel to
http://people.canonical.com/~cndougla/513848. Install the kernel and run
a normal load. It will print out the number of running and
uninterruptible processes each time the load average is calculated
(every 5 seconds) to the kernel log. Please take a screenshot with
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => New
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-
Greetings,
I'm the one who originally reported this bug.
@Chase Douglas
The bug is present on a variety of hardware: single CPU, dual CPU, AMD, Intel.
One more info that has not been added to the description: when one of
the Java threads goes into close loop (some bug in image processing) and
Are you able to test and reproduce this is on a range of hardware, or
just a single model or machine?
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu
I wish I could have gotten a higher CPU usage out of the Karmic test.
Nonetheless, I believe I have a very valid case for discussion.
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bug
** Attachment added: "top_threads-910-A.png"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/40877640/top_threads-910-A.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed t
** Attachment added: "dstat+top+jconsole-910-A_80p.png"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/40877638/dstat%2Btop%2Bjconsole-910-A_80p.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
B
** Attachment added: "dstat+top+jconsole-904-A_80p.png"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/40877627/dstat%2Btop%2Bjconsole-904-A_80p.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
B
Here are new screenshots for Jaunty and Karmic. Each test ran for a
good 25 minutes. I've also added a Karmic screenshot for 'top' showing
(some of) the threads associated with the single Java process. In
addition, I have copied my recent post (2010-03-10) to kernel-
t...@lists.ubuntu.com :
---
In the jaunty image I can see both the load avg and about 15 mins of cpu
usage. They seem to correlate well with each other. In the karmic image
I can only see the load avg and one to two mins of cpu usage. Based on
what I see, the reported load avg number for 5 mins and 1 min seem
reasonable. The
** Attachment added: "dstat+top+jconsole-910.png"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39827774/dstat%2Btop%2Bjconsole-910_edited.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
I've uploaded comparable screenshots for both Jaunty and Karmic.
** Attachment added: "dstat+top+jconsole-904.png"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39827765/dstat%2Btop%2Bjconsole-904_edited.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You receive
The load avg is only related to the number of runnable/uninterruptible
processes. There can be hundreds of threads and 0.00 load avg if they
are all waiting or sleeping.
However, your screenshot shows consistent cpu utilization of 15-20%, so
one would think the load avg would be at least 0.2 for a
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-b
@Chase Douglas
The description is fine. On Karmic, using a generic stress tool
('stress') the simulated load is reported but the specific (real-life)
load I refer to is not. So the problem is a subtle one.
Thank you for the tutorial on cpu load. A *zero* load, however, that
corresponds to hundr
@Peter Matulis,
First, please edit the description for consistency. First you say that
using tomcat on karmic does not produce an expected load. Then you say
that "stress tools applied to Karmic does result in an increase in load
(as expected)." I am guessing that you are meaning to say that Jaunt
@ Peter Matulis, will it be possible to post a screenshot with the
output of dmstat -cmdlni 5 for Karmic as well? Also can you post the
screenshot with the output of top for jaunty ?
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug no
Linux ewp1 2.6.31-14-server #48-Ubuntu SMP Fri Oct 16 15:07:34 UTC 2009
x86_64 GNU/Linux
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu
** Attachment added: "dmesg"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/38757652/dmesg.txt
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs m
** Description changed:
Overview:
Using java-based tools (tomcat) on 64-bit server Karmic reports almost
- non-existent CPU load. Screenshot (screenshot_910.png) displays this.
- However, the same load applied to Jaunty shows a different report
- (screenshot_904.png). Note that stress too
** Attachment added: "load for 9.10"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/38493692/screenshot_910.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Attachment added: "load for 9.04"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/38493677/screenshot_904.png
--
[karmic] CPU load not being reported accurately
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513848
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
68 matches
Mail list logo
