Process & threads - Karmic vs past kernels
chase.douglas at canonical.com
Wed Mar 10 21:08:41 UTC 2010
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Peter Matulis
<peter.matulis at canonical.com> wrote:
> Can anyone tell me whether the Karmic kernel has implemented a different
> way of what it considers a process (as opposed to threads)?
> I have a situation where CPU load is zero on Karmic but considerably
> higher in Jaunty and earlier.
> The scenario is a single java process with many threads. The system has
> 4 cores and only one java process should logically produce a negligible
> CPU load but why was this not the case with earlier kernels? Has
> something changed in Karmic that would explain what I'm seeing?
I doubt that to be the case. Have you been able to get more data for
your bug ?
More information about the kernel-team