On Wednesday 14 April 2010 10:34:08 Kwan Lowe wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Peter A <loony@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Am I doing something wrong? My view is pretty simple but the few tests I > > did seemed to all indicate the same thing... > > > > How valuable is reporting the CPU usage if its not really shows how much > > of maximum CPU power is used? > > > > Wouldn't it make more sense to show CPU usage normalized to the maximum > > frequency rather than the current frequency? > > > > Does the load as display with uptime compensate for power management? I > > went through some of the kernel code the scheduler and the cpufreq > > kernel modules but didn't see anything. > > I don't think so. From my understanding, the load is computed by > sampling at a given interval. The per process load is a function of > how often a particular PID shows up in the sample. > > http://www.teamquest.com/resources/gunther/display/5/index.htm > > I believe this method is used because of limits in a processor knowing > its "speed". I.e., every processor has different metrics, identity > strings, etc.. We can calculate synthetic numbers like bogomips, but > this won't be valid throughout the run of the system (system is not > necessarily at full power during boot or vice versa). To add to this, > the metrics are computed in the kernel so there are performance and > possibly other technical reasons that calculating those numbers can't > be done. Makes sense - cause if you have a run queue, then your CPU is anyway busy and it should clock higher... That kinda makes it a non issue... Any ideas on the other 3 points though? Peter. -- Censorship: noun, circa 1591. a: Relief of the burden of independent thinking. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
