On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 00:04, Colin Leroy wrote: > Hi, > > >First it sets a very high load on the CPU. I wonder if the task is > >correctly scheduled. I'll have a look at that. It's as if the task > >monitoring task was running without yielding the processor... > > No, it just seems to :) You have a 1.0 load average, that's it ? this is > due to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, which is needed according to Benjamin; > however this doesn't eat the cpu power :)
Yes, it's a dodgy heuristic in the load average calculation. You can actually use TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE provided you correctly block signals
