Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:35:39 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: swi4: clock taking 40% cpu?!? Message-ID: <20111215213539.GJ53453@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20111215210421.GA33083@icarus.home.lan> References: <4EEA5DD0.1040009@FreeBSD.org> <20111215210421.GA33083@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Dec 15), Jeremy Chadwick said: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:51:28PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > Web server under heavy'ish load (7 on a 2 cpu system) running > > 8.2-RELEASE-p4 i386 I'm seeing this: > > > > PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND > > 12 root -32 - 0K 112K WAIT 0 129:01 39.99% {swi4: clock} > > > > Any ideas why the clock should be taking so much cpu? HZ=100 if that > > makes a difference ... > > Could be wrong, but I believe this correlates with IRQ 4. What does > vmstat -i show for a total and rate for irq4 if you run it, wait a few > seconds, then run it again? Does the number greatly/rapidly increase? That would be "irq4" in that case, though. "swi4" is just a software interrupt thread, and "clock" is the softclock callout handler. There are both KTR and DTrace logging functions in kern_timeout.c, so you could use either one to get a handle on what's eating your CPU. Busy-looping "procstat -k 12" for a few seconds might get you some useful stacks, as well. > Shot in the dark here, but the only thing I can think of that might > cause this is software being extremely aggressive with calls to things > like gettimeofday(2) or clock_gettime(2). Really not sure. ntpd maybe > (unlikely but possible)? Sort of grasping at straws here. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111215213539.GJ53453>