On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 8:32 AM enh <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 3:44 PM enh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 2:34 PM Rob Landley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 2/6/19 12:56 PM, Dmitry Shmidt wrote: > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > > > > > I am using your top tool implementation for Android from > > > > toybox project. > > > > I am wondering if in the mode where it shows cpu usage > > > > per thread, the total usage per task (process) is included in initial > > > > ("main") thread? > > > > > > I don't really use threads much, Elliott provided most of the use > cases for that. > > > > > > > For example: com.google.android.youtube.tv > > > > <http://com.google.android.youtube.tv> shows 153% usage > > > > for main thread and some more for other threads, like MainWebView - > 31%. > > > > Is this 31% included in 153% report or not? > > > > > > It should never report more than 100%, so it sounds like it is > combining CPU > > > usage from threads into the parent, yes. > > > > > > Hmmm... Top -H isn't showing TID by default, > > > > yeah, that seemed a bit weird to me, but it matches what the > > traditional implementation did. (though threads aren't as common on > > the desktop.) > > > > interestingly, i notice that our numbers don't add up. on the desktop, > > total == running + sleeping, but our sleeping count is a lot lower > > than it should be. (the desktop also says "Tasks:" or "Threads:" > > depending on whether you supplied -H, and we don't.) > > > > we also don't do a good job of sizing the PID field on machines with a > > large pid_max. this fixes both of those minor issues, but between the > > removal of the `const` on the array and the floating point math i > > assume you'll want to do this differently :-) > > any thoughts on how you'd like to fix this so i can send a patch you'd > accept? (the bug bankruptcy bot is asking whether i'm actually going > to do anything about this bug, which reminded me...) >
I am ok with current solution. After we merged: commit 168bfe5382c5a5034b7e208b3253f292b24999ec Author: Rob Landley <[email protected]> Date: Sat Mar 2 22:05:00 2019 -0600 Make top -H show TID instead of PID, not collate %CPU into parent thread (resulting in 400% CPU with 4 threads), and add a couple comments. It works as we think it should. > diff --git a/toys/posix/ps.c b/toys/posix/ps.c > > index 079bdbd6..50f52b41 100644 > > --- a/toys/posix/ps.c > > +++ b/toys/posix/ps.c > > @@ -314,9 +314,9 @@ struct procpid { > > struct typography { > > char *name, *help; > > signed char width, slot; > > -} static const typos[] = TAGGED_ARRAY(PS, > > +} static /*const*/ typos[] = TAGGED_ARRAY(PS, > > // Numbers. (What's in slot[] is what's displayed, sorted > numerically.) > > - {"PID", "Process ID", 5, SLOT_pid}, > > + {"PID", "Process ID", 2, SLOT_pid}, > > {"PPID", "Parent Process ID", 5, SLOT_ppid}, > > {"PRI", "Priority (dynamic 0 to 139)", 3, SLOT_priority}, > > {"NI", "Niceness (static 19 to -20)", 3, SLOT_nice}, > > @@ -1262,6 +1262,16 @@ static void default_ko(char *s, void *fields, > char *err, > > struct arg_list *arg) > > if (x) help_help(); > > } > > > > +static void init_pid_width(void) > > +{ > > + FILE *fp = xfopen("/proc/sys/kernel/pid_max", "re"); > > + int pid_max; > > + > > + fscanf(fp, "%d", &pid_max); > > + fclose(fp); > > + typos[0].width = ceil(log10(pid_max)); > > +} > > + > > void ps_main(void) > > { > > char **arg; > > @@ -1270,6 +1280,7 @@ void ps_main(void) > > int i; > > > > TT.ticks = sysconf(_SC_CLK_TCK); // units for starttime/uptime > > + init_pid_width(); > > > > if (-1 != (i = tty_fd())) { > > struct stat st; > > @@ -1546,8 +1557,9 @@ static void top_common( > > for (i = 0; i<mix.count; i++) > > run[1+stridx("RSTZ", *string_field(mix.tb[i], &field))]++; > > sprintf(toybuf, > > - "Tasks: %d total,%4ld running,%4ld sleeping,%4ld stopped," > > - "%4ld zombie", mix.count, run[1], run[2], run[3], run[4]); > > + "%ss: %d total, %3ld running, %3ld sleeping, %3ld stopped, " > > + "%3ld zombie", FLAG(H)?"Thread":"Task", mix.count, > > + run[1], run[2], run[3], run[4]); > > lines = header_line(lines, 0); > > > > if (readfile("/proc/meminfo", toybuf, sizeof(toybuf))) { > > @@ -1697,6 +1709,7 @@ static void top_setup(char *defo, char *defk) > > { > > TT.ticks = sysconf(_SC_CLK_TCK); // units for starttime/uptime > > TT.tty = tty_fd() != -1; > > + init_pid_width(); > > > > // Are we doing "batch" output or interactive? > > if (FLAG(b)) TT.width = TT.height = 99999; > > > > > > > and top -H -O TID is never showing > > > more than one instance of the same PID... until I sort by TID, and > then I get a > > > bunch of chrome threads under the same PID, each with 1.5% of the CPU. > So yeah, > > > CPU usage is per process here, not per thread. > > > > > > I'm trying to cut a release, but let me add that to the todo list for > next > > > release. (I should try to come up with a better test case because y > system's way > > > too loaded normally...) > > > > > > Rob > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Toybox mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net >
_______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
