Subject: bin/11950: Top does not show process sizes correctly
To: None <gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org>
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@cambridge.arm.com>
List: netbsd-bugs
Date: 01/13/2001 04:56:20
>Number: 11950
>Category: bin
>Synopsis: Top does not show process sizes correctly
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: medium
>Responsible: bin-bug-people
>State: open
>Class: sw-bug
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Sat Jan 13 04:56:01 PST 2001
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Richard Earnshaw
>Release: NetBSD-current<NetBSD-current source date>
>Organization:
ARM
--
>Environment:
System: NetBSD shark1 1.5H NetBSD 1.5H (SHARK) #57: Mon Oct 30 17:12:12 GMT 2000 rearnsha@shark1:/usr/src/sys/arch/arm32/compile/SHARK arm32
>Description:
Top seems to display bogus information about the process size.
It shows that there is more of the process resident than its total
size. Which seems very non-intuitive.
PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
12713 rearnsha 64 0 6872K 13M run 0:47 96.91% 88.57% cc1
12714 rearnsha 28 0 192K 1008K onproc 0:00 0.66% 0.20% top
12096 rearnsha 2 0 1112K 1096K sleep 0:04 0.15% 0.15% xterm
169 root 18 -12 692K 3684K sleep 2:00 0.00% 0.00% ntpd
212 rearnsha 2 0 1120K 584K sleep 1:07 0.00% 0.00% <xterm>
108 root 2 0 92K 468K sleep 0:55 0.00% 0.00% ypbind
214 rearnsha 2 0 1128K 580K sleep 0:20 0.00% 0.00% <xterm>
152 root 2 0 316K 488K sleep 0:20 0.00% 0.00% amd
216 rearnsha 10 0 836K 596K sleep 0:09 0.00% 0.00% <bash>
215 rearnsha 10 0 784K 596K sleep 0:06 0.00% 0.00% <bash>
103 root 2 0 292K 436K sleep 0:06 0.00% 0.00% rpcbind
12097 rearnsha 10 0 764K 988K sleep 0:05 0.00% 0.00% bash
90 root 2 0 88K 360K sleep 0:05 0.00% 0.00% syslogd
11771 rearnsha 10 0 1496K 508K sleep 0:04 0.00% 0.00% <gmake>
196 root 10 0 212K 504K sleep 0:04 0.00% 0.00% cron
201 root 10 0 48K 472K sleep 0:02 0.00% 0.00% <getty>
9572 rearnsha 2 0 100K 408K sleep 0:02 0.00% 0.00% tail
203 root 10 0 48K 472K sleep 0:01 0.00% 0.00% <getty>
>How-To-Repeat:
Run top, look at the process sizes.
>Fix:
No idea. It might be the kernel reporting information incorrectly,
or it might be top failing to interpret the results correctly.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: