John, the changes are good. The "'trickling' but still not idle" processes now show up as they should.
However, it has exposed one quirk in the display: Sorting is done by WCPU followed by total processor time. Processes which aren't idle (but are using so little cpu it shows as 0.00%) show below processes which are truely idle, but have totaled more processor time overall. This is more noticable with your new patch, as toggling between idle-only and full now shows processes appearing higher in the list than some which only appear in the non-idle view! Ideally, processes where cpu "is virtually 0.00% but really a smidgen higher" should be display higher. I realise the pctcpu granularity is at fault here. Basically, what I'm saying is that truely idle processes should appear below other processes reporting 0.00% cpu. In other words, what I'm asking is: shouldn't the cpu sort priority not simply be keyed on 'ki_pctcpu', but on a primary key based on "if cur->ki_runtime == old->ki_runtime ?" followed by secondary key ki_pctcpu. Or even easier, shouldn't simply sorting on (cur->ki_runtime - old->ki_runtime) suffice? Is this a valid point, and if it is, is it practical, and/or easy enough to achieve? I'll even have a stab at it myself tomorrow, after hopefully getting some sleep (32 hours without sleep - sorry for incoherency - insomnia is a PITA) Cheers, Jamie _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"