Rob van der Heij wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Leland Lucius <[email protected]> wrote:
Any ideas on how I could prove it WASN'T cpuplugd? I'd rather not have
to turn it off...
Interesting observation. I would not have suspected it.Fortunately,
with WAS it does not do any good for you to run cpuplugd so you could
easily disable it (without even restarting the application).
Actually, I wasn't really suspecting cpuplugd itself...all it's doing is
monitoring and (un)plugging CPUs (probably via /sys, but I haven't
looked). I reckon it would have been more appropriate to say I was
concerned about the CPUs going on/offline in regards to the kernel. I
don't know, maybe something like the CPU went offline before an
interrupt arrived or some such nonsense. (Basically, I'm grasping at
any possible cause.)
But, I'm curious why hottplugging CPUs doesn't do WAS any good?
Leland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
