Bug 461215 - ridiculous time for watchdog/1 kernel process
Summary: ridiculous time for watchdog/1 kernel process
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
medium
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kernel Maintainer List
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-09-05 00:44 UTC by Tom Horsley
Modified: 2008-10-30 01:33 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-10-30 01:33:48 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tom Horsley 2008-09-05 00:44:46 UTC
Description of problem:

In both top and ps, the watchdog/1 process shows up with utterly
ridiculous cpu time. For example here is what ps says on a newly
booted system:

[tom@zooty ~]$ ps f -u root
  PID TTY      STAT   TIME COMMAND
 2520 ?        S      0:00 hald-runner
 2548 ?        S      0:00  \_ hald-addon-input: Listening on /dev/input/event2 
 2554 ?        S      0:00  \_ /usr/libexec/hald-addon-cpufreq
 2619 ?        S      0:00  \_ hald-addon-storage: polling /dev/sr0 (every 2 sec
 2631 ?        S      0:00  \_ hald-addon-storage: no polling on /dev/fd0 becaus
    2 ?        S<     0:00 [kthreadd]
    3 ?        S<     0:00  \_ [migration/0]
    4 ?        S<     0:00  \_ [ksoftirqd/0]
    5 ?        S<     0:00  \_ [watchdog/0]
    6 ?        S<     0:00  \_ [migration/1]
    7 ?        S<     0:00  \_ [ksoftirqd/1]
    8 ?        S<   21114574:23  \_ [watchdog/1]
...

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-2.6.27-0.297.rc5.git2.fc10.x86_64

How reproducible:
Every time I run ps or top I see the silly time info.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. see above
2.
3.
  
Actual results:

ridiculous time for watchdog/1

Expected results:

Time very near zero in a newly booted system.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Christopher D. Stover 2008-10-29 14:14:47 UTC
Still experiencing this problem in newer kernels Tom?

Comment 2 Tom Horsley 2008-10-29 14:52:01 UTC
I haven't noticed it recently. I guess new kernle must have fixed it.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.