AMOUSE eating CPU time? - OS2

This is a discussion on AMOUSE eating CPU time? - OS2 ; During the last week the lazy-time CPU load on my system jumped from 0% to 13%. According to DosPerfSysCall(), 97% of these is spent at interrupt time.[*] The only change I remember is install of AMOUSE. Can it be the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

  1. AMOUSE eating CPU time?


    During the last week the lazy-time CPU load on my system jumped from
    0% to 13%. According to DosPerfSysCall(), 97% of these is spent at
    interrupt time.[*]

    The only change I remember is install of AMOUSE. Can it be the
    reason? Any way to it?

    Thanks,
    Ilya

    [*] Checked by something like

    perl -wle "$|=1; while (1) {@n=OS2:erfSysCall;print(($n[3]-$o[3])/ ($n[0]-$o[0])); @o=@n;sleep 1}"

  2. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    this is a symptom reported form time to time (IRQ time high with no apparant
    reason).

    it would be nice to get to the bottom of it.


    "Ilya Zakharevich" wrote in message
    news:csc6jd$emr$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
    >
    > During the last week the lazy-time CPU load on my system jumped from
    > 0% to 13%. According to DosPerfSysCall(), 97% of these is spent at
    > interrupt time.[*]
    >
    > The only change I remember is install of AMOUSE. Can it be the
    > reason? Any way to it?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Ilya
    >
    >
    >[*] Checked by something like
    >
    > perl -wle "$|=1; while (1) {@n=OS2:erfSysCall;print(($n[3]-$o[3])/

    ($n[0]-$o[0])); @o=@n;sleep 1}"



  3. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    eric w
    ], who wrote in article <35bgk1F4j3poqU1@individual.net>:
    > > During the last week the lazy-time CPU load on my system jumped from
    > > 0% to 13%. According to DosPerfSysCall(), 97% of these is spent at
    > > interrupt time.[*]
    > >
    > > The only change I remember is install of AMOUSE. Can it be the

    > reason? Any way to fix it?


    > this is a symptom reported form time to time (IRQ time high with no apparant
    > reason).


    Is it reported in connection to AMOUSE, or unrelated?

    Meanwhile my system runs again at load 0%. No substantial change to
    configuration was made.

    I have no reason to think that this is related to install of AMOUSE
    any more...

    Thanks,
    Ilya

  4. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    seems to me this is a buggy device driver or kernelbug but it is very
    elusive.
    seems to come & go; I read about someone reporting this problem, but then it
    goes as quickly as it came.

    ....eric

    "Ilya Zakharevich" wrote in message
    news:ct1n5d$2l4r$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
    > [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    > eric w
    > ], who wrote in article <35bgk1F4j3poqU1@individual.net>:
    > > > During the last week the lazy-time CPU load on my system jumped from
    > > > 0% to 13%. According to DosPerfSysCall(), 97% of these is spent at
    > > > interrupt time.[*]
    > > >
    > > > The only change I remember is install of AMOUSE. Can it be the

    > > reason? Any way to fix it?

    >
    > > this is a symptom reported form time to time (IRQ time high with no

    apparant
    > > reason).

    >
    > Is it reported in connection to AMOUSE, or unrelated?
    >
    > Meanwhile my system runs again at load 0%. No substantial change to
    > configuration was made.
    >
    > I have no reason to think that this is related to install of AMOUSE
    > any more...
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Ilya




  5. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 19:54:10 UTC, "eric w" wrote:

    > seems to me this is a buggy device driver or kernelbug but it is very
    > elusive.
    > seems to come & go; I read about someone reporting this problem, but then it
    > goes as quickly as it came.
    >


    Grab IRQMon from hobbes. It is a graphical monitor of the interrupts
    being used. It won't tell you what's wrong, but, it will tell you
    which IRQ is chewing up the CPU.


    --
    David Forrester
    davidfor at internode dot on dot net
    http://www.os2world.com/djfos2

  6. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    David Forrester
    ], who wrote in article :

    > Grab IRQMon from hobbes. It is a graphical monitor of the interrupts
    > being used. It won't tell you what's wrong, but, it will tell you
    > which IRQ is chewing up the CPU.


    Pity that it came too late. But maybe this IRQ flood will return, and
    I will use your advice.

    Thanks,
    Ilya

  7. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    eric w
    ], who wrote in article <35l233F4o02c0U1@individual.net>:
    > seems to me this is a buggy device driver or kernelbug but it is very
    > elusive.
    > seems to come & go; I read about someone reporting this problem, but then it
    > goes as quickly as it came.


    Meanwhile the IRQ flood suddently reappeared. IRQMON shows it is
    IRQ=5. Changing from PAR1284 to PRINT01 did not help. Other stuff on
    IRQ=5 is USB and Ethernet...

    Puzzled,
    Ilya

  8. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    my first move would be to dedicate an IRQ to my NIC. I have always found
    IRQ sharing on OS/2 to be like Russian Roulette!

    "Ilya Zakharevich" wrote in message
    news:d2k3ir$2pt8$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
    > [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    > eric w
    > ], who wrote in article <35l233F4o02c0U1@individual.net>:
    > > seems to me this is a buggy device driver or kernelbug but it is very
    > > elusive.
    > > seems to come & go; I read about someone reporting this problem, but

    then it
    > > goes as quickly as it came.

    >
    > Meanwhile the IRQ flood suddently reappeared. IRQMON shows it is
    > IRQ=5. Changing from PAR1284 to PRINT01 did not help. Other stuff on
    > IRQ=5 is USB and Ethernet...
    >
    > Puzzled,
    > Ilya




  9. Re: AMOUSE eating CPU time?

    [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    eric w
    ], who wrote in article :
    > my first move would be to dedicate an IRQ to my NIC. I have always found
    > IRQ sharing on OS/2 to be like Russian Roulette!


    Sure. But note that the current setup *works*. ;-) While all the
    others I tried before do not. ;-(

    Ilya

+ Reply to Thread