Re: bsnmpd hrProcessorLoad results incorrect on FreeBSD 7 or 8?

On Mon, 19 May 2008, Michael Proto wrote:

Hi,

> Stanislav A Svirid wrote:
>> On Wed 07 May, 2008, Harti Brandt wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 6 May 2008, Michael Proto wrote:
>>> 
>>> MP>Mike Tancsa wrote:
>>> MP>> At 08:55 PM 5/6/2008, Michael Proto wrote:
>>> MP>> > Is anyone seeing problems with bsnmpd reporting an incorrect
>>> MP>> > HOST-RESOURCES-MIB::hrProcessorLoad value under HEAD? I'm using the
>>> MP>> > default /etc/snmpd.config settings and am loading the
>>> MP>> > /usr/lib/snmp_hostres.so library just as I do in 6.3, but the value 
>>> for
>>> MP>> > this MIB always reports CPU utilization at 100% regardless of the 
>>> actual
>>> MP>> > load on the system. 6.3 and 6-STABLE both work correctly and report 
>>> the
>>> MP>> > actual CPU utilization when queried.
>>> MP>>
>>> MP>> IIRC, I noticed this when I changed to ULE from 4BSD_SCHED.
>>> MP>>
>>> MP>>         ---Mike
>>> MP>> _______________________________________________
>>> MP>> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
>>> MP>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
>>> MP>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
>>> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
>>> MP>
>>> MP>Would match my environment as well, as I'm using ULE on all of the
>>> MP>affected systems. Just built a 4BSD kernel on my HEAD system and
>>> MP>HOST-RESOURCES-MIB::hrProcessorLoad reports a correct value again.
>>> MP>
>>> MP>Anyone have an idea on a fix?
>>> 
>>> If anybody has a fix that works with both schedulers, I happily commit
>>> this.
>> 
>> Here you are :)
>> 
>> --- hostres_processor_tbl.c.old	2008-05-07 17:23:47.000000000 +0700
>> +++ hostres_processor_tbl.c	2008-05-07 17:23:54.000000000 +0700
>> _at__at_ -120,7 +120,7 _at__at_ static double
>>  processor_getpcpu(struct kinfo_proc *ki_p)
>>  {
>> 
>> -	if (ccpu == 0 || fscale == 0)
>> +	if (fscale == 0)
>>  		return (0.0);
>>
>>  #define	fxtofl(fixpt) ((double)(fixpt) / fscale)
>> 
>
>
> This worked (sorta). On my PCEngines ALIX platform CPU utilization on
> HEAD dropped down to 0-2% from a constant 100%. It looks slightly
> incorrect though, as there is 3-4% interrupt load at all times on that
> system (as per top and vmstat). Still a much better representation than
> before though.
>
> So is this fix facetious and I'm not seeing it due to my lack of C prowess?

there are further problems. I talked with Jeffr about this and
forwarded him the details.

As we all have been in transit the last days/... give him a few more
days.


/bz

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb              Stop bit received. Insert coin for new game.