| To: | colin <colin@realtek.com.tw> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: uptime is too high. Is it normal? |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:36:09 +0000 |
| Cc: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <00a101c64ce9$554b3180$106215ac@realtek.com.tw> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <009101c64ce4$72d78820$106215ac@realtek.com.tw> <20060321125255.GA8779@linux-mips.org> <00a101c64ce9$554b3180$106215ac@realtek.com.tw> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 09:14:06PM +0800, colin wrote: > 646 root DW [646] > 647 root DW [647] > > The uptime value keeps on going higher and higher. > It seems that both 646 & 647 process has the same parent "1". > Their "utime" are "0". Yes, these two are the offenders. A process should never be for a long time in "D" state. You'll have to figure out what these processes are doing, but they something wrong with these two. The load average btw is a fairly artificial meassure. On a properly working system it describes the burn of the workload of the system reasonably well - but if things go wrong and cause processes to get stuck in D state (aka uninterruptible sleep) then a system may well still be perfectly responsive even though the load is very high. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: uptime is too high. Is it normal?, colin |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Building GCC for BCM1480 SiByte, James E Wilson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: uptime is too high. Is it normal?, colin |
| Next by Thread: | how to get a process backtrace from kernel gdb?, Srinivas Kommu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |