Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 23:53:51 +0100 From: Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@gmail.com> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Viktor_=C5=A0tujber?= <viktor.stujber@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/173541: load average 0.60 at 100% idle Message-ID: <CAPjTQNGCDG6n%2ByRjuJABWWaRCKmGvzfOoR0=OPMPs0JrSmQkGw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201301032250.r03Mo1Eg075602@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <201301032250.r03Mo1Eg075602@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
add this or similar this to /boot/loader.conf hint.hpet.0.allowed_irqs=3D"0x00400000" On 1/3/13, Viktor =C5=A0tujber <viktor.stujber@gmail.com> wrote: > The following reply was made to PR kern/173541; it has been noted by GNAT= S. > > From: =3D?UTF-8?B?VmlrdG9yIMWgdHVqYmVy?=3D <viktor.stujber@gmail.com> > To: Johan Broman <je.broman@gmail.com> > Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org > Subject: Re: kern/173541: load average 0.60 at 100% idle > Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:44:46 +0100 > > For my system's kernel I just undid that one revision I mentioned > earlier. No ill-effects observed. Since the change is so low-level and > there is no rationale provided in the commit message, I do not know what > improvement it was supposed to achieve. I tried e-mailing the author of > that commit, but got no response. > Also, due to the low-power nature of my system, I can't test if the 0.60 > load is real, or just a by-product of broken time accounting. Either way > it might be affecting the process scheduler. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-bugs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPjTQNGCDG6n%2ByRjuJABWWaRCKmGvzfOoR0=OPMPs0JrSmQkGw>