Stopped processes with negative priority
Hans Mulder
hansm at cs.kun.nl
Sat May 18 07:24:16 AEST 1991
In <1991May16.062850.14385 at Think.COM> barmar at think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
>From time to time I notice stopped processes with negative priority
>(perhaps always -5, in case this is significant) on our Sun-4's (running
>SunOS 4.1.1, but I think I remember seeing this in earlier SunOS releases
>as well).
For what it's worth, I just noticed one on a Sun-3, alsos running SunOS4.1.1,
also at -5.
>I generally notice it because any process with a negative
>priority is included in the load average, and the load sometimes gets
>pinned at 1.5-2 even though no processes are running hard. If I send the
>process a SIGCONT it immediately stops again, but this time with a positive
>priority, so the load goes down to a reasonable level.
Not here: I sent the process a SIGCONT and it switched back to raw mode
and then stopped on a SIGTTOU. My shell dislikes raw input and died...
>I suspect that the problem may be a kernel race condition. The processes
>in this state always seem to be full screen programs. I suspect what's
>happening is that the program catches SIGTSTP, resets tty modes, and then
>sends itself a SIGSTOP to stop itself for real. Maybe the process is being
>stopped before the kernel has restored the priority.
Mine was a full screen program (vi, to be specific). Vi sends itself a
SIGTSTP, not a SIGSTOP.
>Is this indicative of a real problem? Are these processes using any more
>system resources than ordinary stopped processes? If they're counted in
>the load average, then I assume this means that they're sitting on the
>active process queue, so are they increasing the scheduler overhead?
Not necessarily: processes in a non-interruptible wait are also counted
in the load average. As an extreme example, the parent in a vfork() is
counted in the load average when the only resource it has is a process
table entry.
I guess processes in whatever form of wait shouldn't be counted in the
load average.
--
Have a nice day,
Hans Mulder hansm at cs.kun.nl
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list