Rafael Vanoni wrote: > Hi Aubrey > > Sorry for the late reply, I got caught up into another project. > I'll work on your suggestions and have something for you next week. > I'm going away for an OSS conference this week. >
No problem, ;-) Thanks for your work! -Aubrey > > Aubrey Li wrote: >> 2008/4/8 Rafael Vanoni <Rafael.Vanoni at sun.com>: >>> - added the -i option, which implements what we've been talking >>> about correlating cyclic events with idle state transitions >>> >> That's not what I expect. >> 1) the bug is not fixed in the default output. >> 2) output with -i option on my side, clock/cyclic wakeup is missing. >> and -i option is useless by the common user. >> ======== >> Wakeups-from-idle per second: 337.0 interval: 8.0s >> >> Top causes for wakeups: >> 44.6% (150.4) <kernel> : >> uhci`uhci_handle_root_hub_status_change >> 19.8% ( 66.6) <kernel> : >> ehci`ehci_handle_root_hub_status_change >> 10.0% ( 33.8) java : <scheduled timeout >> expiration> >> 3.0% ( 10.0) <kernel> : ata`ghd_timeout >> 1.8% ( 6.0) <kernel> : uhci`uhci_cmd_timeout_hdlr >> 1.2% ( 4.0) <kernel> : genunix`schedpaging >> 0.9% ( 3.0) <kernel> : genunix`lwp_timer_timeout >> 0.8% ( 2.7) <interrupt> : e1000g#1 >> 0.8% ( 2.6) sched : <scheduled timeout >> expiration> >> 0.3% ( 1.0) <kernel> : TS`ts_update >> 0.3% ( 1.0) <kernel> : e1000g`e1000g_local_timer >> ----snip---- ======== >> >> as we discussed before, the root cause is, cyclics are being batch >> processed. so one wakeup has 3 or more cyclics. that causes the >> count of "software waking up" doesn't match the counts of the "cpu >> wakeups", and because these cyclics number is too large, always be >> equal to the clock frequency, it looks very remarkable and >> confusing. >> >> Maybe we should deal with this issue by this way: >> >> (1) from the system admin's point of view, cyclics reports is >> meaningless, even if they found inefficient cyclic subsystem >> consumers, they can't do anything but just feel frustrated. However, >> back to back applications is different, they can be killed by admin. >> >> (2) from the developer's point of view, cyclics report is necessary, >> tracking down the inefficient consumers will improve the solaris >> kernel. >> >> So I suggest we make (1) as default and add an option to enable (2) >> or more events. >> >> Does this make sense? >> >> Thanks, >> -Aubrey > > _______________________________________________ > tesla-dev mailing list > tesla-dev at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev
