From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org  Tue Dec 26 09:18:32 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 314F5EAC4C1;
 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 09:18:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net)
Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [78.47.246.247])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9ECB6BF75;
 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 09:18:31 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net)
Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (root@eg.sd.rdtc.ru [62.231.161.221] (may be
 forged))
 by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id vBQ9IND2058935
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT);
 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 10:18:24 +0100 (CET)
 (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net)
X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net
X-Envelope-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eugen@localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBQ9IKLl050625;
 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 16:18:20 +0700 (+07)
 (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net)
Subject: Re: idprio(1) broken
To: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>
References: <5A421212.4040703@grosbein.net>
Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
Message-ID: <5A4213DC.20508@grosbein.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 16:18:20 +0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5A421212.4040703@grosbein.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, LOCAL_FROM, RDNS_NONE,
 T_DATE_IN_FUTURE_Q_PLUS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-Spam-Report: * 0.0 T_DATE_IN_FUTURE_Q_PLUS Date: is over 4 months after
 Received: date
 * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 *      [score: 0.0000]
 *  1.9 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
 *  2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on hz.grosbein.net
X-Spam-Level: **
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 09:18:32 -0000

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.