Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 26 Dec 2017 16:18:20 +0700
From:      Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
To:        FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: idprio(1) broken
Message-ID:  <5A4213DC.20508@grosbein.net>
In-Reply-To: <5A421212.4040703@grosbein.net>
References:  <5A421212.4040703@grosbein.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26.12.2017 16:10, Eugene Grosbein wrote:

> Is idprio(1) broken in stable/11?
> 
> As root, start one bzip2 instance with idprio and one additional bzip2 intance per CPU core:
> 
> # idprio 5 bzip2 -9 </dev/zero >/dev/null &
> # n=$(sysctl -n kern.smp.cpus)
> # i=1; while [ $i -le $n ]; do bzip2 -9 </dev/zero >/dev/null & i=$(($i+1)); done
> # top
> 
> For dual core system, I see that idprio'd bzip2 takes all cycles of first core
> and two "normal" bzip2's share cycles of second core each taking ~50% of CPU time.
> 
> It is expected that idprio'd bzip2 get no CPU time at all and each of "normal" bzip2's
> get ~100% of single CPU core for such setup.

This works as expected for stable/10.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5A4213DC.20508>