From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 21 10:27:21 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FE61065670 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:27:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luigi@onelab2.iet.unipi.it) Received: from onelab2.iet.unipi.it (onelab2.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.129]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6997E8FC13 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:27:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luigi@onelab2.iet.unipi.it) Received: by onelab2.iet.unipi.it (Postfix, from userid 275) id 3BAFD730A8; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:31:29 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:31:29 +0200 From: Luigi Rizzo To: stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20081021103129.GC93431@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Subject: huge cpu and memory usage by ld.so ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:27:21 -0000 On RELENG_7 (various versions between june and a few days ago) i noticed that sometimes ld.so starts using huge amounts of memory and CPU, both in terms of SIZE and RES. I saw it first on 3 different machines doing a portupgrade -a while X was active, but perhaps it is Xorg-related because even stopping portupgrade the phenomenon continues, and the Xorg process also comes next in terms of CPU usage (not memory though, it stays down to reasonable levels). This is the 'top' output during a portupgrade -a PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 17385 luigi 1 107 0 2027M 220M RUN 1 19:20 51.37% ld-2.3.6.so and it really goes up with time, at perhaps 50-100Mbytes per minute. 2 of the machines use the nvidia-driver, one is a Dell X1 laptop with an i915 board. Exiting from X seems to terminate the stray ld.so. I am not sure how reproducible the thing is, or whether it is a known issue (perhaps portupgrade is replacing some Xorg component while the Xorg process is using it ?) cheers luigi