From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 010F19086 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:55:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CD99A33F7D for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:54:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:54:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2A01642FC0 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:54:32 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4ab17011-52ca-9bf5-05e6-7a5b8dadb6b3@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:54:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Maximiliano Sandoval References: <20230620154608.338825-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20230620154608.338825-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.001 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.09 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container] fix #4765: lxc: report cpu usage correctly X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:55:03 -0000 Am 20.06.23 um 17:46 schrieb Maximiliano Sandoval: > When running `pct status VMID` the variable Issue is only present with --verbose. > $last_proc_vmid_stat->{$vmid} is not set and pct reports no cpu usage. > > We address this by computing the used cpu time over the total uptime of > the container. > qm would have the same issue, but there, we don't even output a line for "cpu:" ;) IMHO, the average of the CPU usage across the whole uptime is not what most people would expect this value to be. Maybe we should just remove the line from the output like in qm (technically a breaking change) or maybe query the CPU stats twice with a small time window in between? No matter what approach we go for, the behavior of qm and pct should be made consistent here (if no good reason against it pops up).