Utkarsh as preparing a fix and asked me about reproducing it. But it seems usual use cases like this won't show the problem:
# Track sudo /usr/lib/sysstat/sa1 -C checknotick 2 /tmp/samine # print sar -u ALL -P ALL -f /tmp/samine It might be that this is due to Ubuntu not having a fully tickless kernel => https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1587265 Even with modern "leave the cpu alone" things that issue isn't exposed. Like: CONFIG_NO_HZ_IDLE=y (which we have) pluse: GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="isolcpus=2" @Thorsten - is there a reasonable way to trigger the issue, because if there isn't (e.g. only with self built kernel and further steps) I'm considering this to be great to be fixed in recent versions, but not easily qualifying for the SRU [1] policy. There is always a tradeoff between potential regressions (low in this case) and the gain. But there is also the tradeoff between forcing everyone to download a new sysstat and the gain - and if the gain in this case is a super rare edge case setup with custom kernels - then I'm leaning to say that in that case one can PPA build a sysstat as well (or as always upgrade). Hence I'm interested in learning about the ways you used to trigger this as it might be way more common than I think atm - please let us know. [1]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1921747 Title: Backport missing %gnice CPU value for tickless CPU in sysstat. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysstat/+bug/1921747/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
