From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 23 16:58:06 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD1E16A41C; Mon, 23 May 2005 16:58:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EFCF43D1D; Mon, 23 May 2005 16:58:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j4NH0ae0022464; Mon, 23 May 2005 11:00:36 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <42920B70.9040605@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:57:20 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050218 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: juli mallett References: <200505181330.j4IDU8FV035625@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050523073344.GA65484@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050523160424.GK1201@green.homeunix.org> <429200D1.4040602@samsco.org> <20050523165452.GA10581@toxic.magnesium.net> In-Reply-To: <20050523165452.GA10581@toxic.magnesium.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: Brian Fundakowski Feldman , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Giorgos Keramidas , David O'Brien Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/top commands.c machine.h top.c src/usr.bin/top machine.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:58:06 -0000 juli mallett wrote: > * Scott Long [ Date: 2005-05-23 ] > [ w.r.t. Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/top commands.c machine.h top.c src/usr.bin/top machine.c ] > >>Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: >> >>>On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 12:33:44AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: >>> >>> >>>>On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:30:08PM +0000, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>keramida 2005-05-18 13:30:08 UTC >>>>> >>>>>FreeBSD src repository (doc committer) >>>>> >>>>>Modified files: >>>>> contrib/top commands.c machine.h top.c >>>>> usr.bin/top machine.c >>>>>Log: >>>>>Merge the CPU and WCPU columns in a single %6.2f column, add a new 'C' >>>>>command that toggles between the two and update the ORDER_PCTCPU() >>>>>macro to sort correctly by the visible "cpu" value. >>>> >>>>Having both CPU and WCPU are a lot more useful than showing the number of >>>>threads. Out of the top 70 processes I'm running right now, only _1_ is >>>>multi-threaded. >>>> >>>>How about backing all this out and making your toggle be between #threads >>>>and something else -- with the something else being the default thing >>>>shown. >>>> >>>>I still don't know what was wrong with the 'H' display of top(1) which >>>>was all about threading. >>> >>> >>>Could you explain what WCPU/CPU are supposed to differentiate? In years >>>of using FreeBSD I don't think I've seen them ever be different, so I'm >>>always left wondering why there's what appears to be wasted screen >>>real-estate. >>> >> >>man top >> >>[...] >>WCPU, when displayed, is the weighted cpu percentage (this is the same >>value that ps(1) displays as CPU), CPU is the raw percentage and is the >>field that is sorted to determine the order of the processes >>[...] >> >>I'm not sure which FreeBSD you've been using for years, but the numbers >>are almost never the same for all of the machines that I have. > > > I don't know what machines you're using, but on almost all the FreeBSD > machines I use, most of the tasks are idle, and thus CPU and WCPU will > be the same (0.00, 0.00). As for running tasks, yes, Brian must be > thinking of something else. That said, the numbers are almost always > the same, at least given my sample set. > > juli. Sorry for not being explicit about idle processes. Scott