Toss away.... Anyhow, one of the reasons for Linux is open source. There are new to Linux folk that think that all bugs shall be fixed by the company or group. This is not how it works. You either report the bug and hope someone nails it or dig in yourself to fix it and if you fix it contribute to the effort.
I've never had the time to dig in and fix more than say a configuration file to get something to work or contribute hardware to a developer but my point here is that Linux is different from Windows when it comes to bugs like this.
Oh yeah, I'd thought of that. I have only 3 usb ports on this machine, one of which is always in use by a unifying receiver for my mouse. It would be nice to avoid plugging in another device leaving just one port for anything else that I need. I have an extra usb dongle lying around, I may try that. Its pretty frustrating that the Fedora crew can't fix this bug. I don't want to toss around insults but to call yourself state of the art and this bug exists for 6 versions??? Come on.
Here's my exit. Not that I'm abandoning you but want to share how I fixed a machine with WiFi support issues when I couldn't change to another distro. FIX! I plugged in another WiFi USB stick and that worked. I disabled the onboard and moved to the next problem.
Now I understand some may gripe about such a fix but here these sticks are from 8 to 20ish bucks and plentiful. Here is the USA and Amazon is quick to deliver so I have that going for me.
So its been a few days... the WiFi seems intermittent again. I have indeed checked out the link you sent me and tried the solution but it doesn't seem to work. I then tried comment #27's solution, some command with tcdump which printed out almost exactly what comment #37 got.
When I compile a Linux kernel and use too many cores (my server is an 8 core dual cpu) it gets very hot. I monitor the temperature with the sensors tool. That also monitors my RAM heat. It has saved my ass on a number of occasions! :-)
As to your WHY part of the question you would have to dig into the load balancer used in your Linux kernal. There were many balancers used in Linux since it rolled out and I didn't bother to keep track as it worked and I didn't need to be that close to the kernal inner workings. But that doesn't mean you can't investigate which balancer they use in your kernal.
As to the does it cost, I found more cores reduced total run or startup times so the load balancer definitely reduced costs.
"This is a type of load-balancing or system optimization." Actualy I was asking if this is happening (you wrote that it does) how and why . Why its load-balancing system optimization to assign a job from one core to other ? Does it have cost ? How ? (the WHY question is more important)
You left out details that might help. Always supply full model numbers, age and prior service. For example if it's years old I always try a new CMOS battery (cheapest part, might fix it, worth the risk.) Some feel that spending 1 dollar is too much a risk and maybe they are telling you they want a new laptop.
The symptoms are not a sure sign it's this or that but I'd try the new battery then the usual soft reset which is simple. Remove the power adapter, unplug the big battery then press and hold the power button for 60 seconds. Release, slip in the big battery, apply power and re-test.
When I plug in AC to my old Toshiba laptop red and white LED comes on. If I press the power button to turn the PC on there will be a blinking white light in between the power and charging LED which red and white but not fan spin. Or display on the screen. I have even tried connecting to external monitor yet no display. Pls help me
This is a type of load-balancing or system optimization. It is normal behavior and is built into the kernel. In any case, using top to do what you are interested in is not optimal. Check out sar - read the man page for that.
Could it be that the job is not changing in which core is executed but the indexes in the report by 'top' command is changing over time (e.g. the core that seems as Cpu1 for a while becomes Cpu5 when there is a refresh in data) ?
Hello , I am not Linux and Unix expert so maybe this is a simple question to be answered , I am just not sure. I have a sever with 8 cores (running CENTOS) that executes a batch job once a day for few minutes . I tried to monitor the CPU usage foreach core when the batch is executed using the top command and then pressing '1'.
There I saw something really strange (for me). Initially I saw that job being executed in Cpu5 (it was obvious because it is a job that needs almost 100% of the CPU that is executed) , then Cpu5 usage dropped and Cpu1 usage starting to raise , and then Cpu1 was 100%. That happened several times switching other CPU cores as well (randomly as far as I can tell).
Could a single job that is not using threads change in what CPU core is executed? Is that normal? And if so why is it happening?
I recently created a post thinking I had blown up my bootloader but I've actually narrowed the problem down to the SSD on which my home directory is mounted. The reason my computer has not been booting is because my system is not mounting my home directory's SSD. This started after I opened my box and installed a new SSD which is now unplugged and not being used. Every since I opened my box my computer wouldn't boot again. I edited /etc/fstab while booted in a live USB and commented out the line telling my computer to auto mount the SSD drive to /home/user/. After that my computer has booted up just fine, except that I'm given a generic home directory without all of my files.
When I try to mount the drive manually this is what I get.
user@mothership ~ $ sudo mount /dev/sdd1 /home/user/
mount: special device /dev/sdd1 does not exist
user@mothership ~ $ dmesg | tail
[ 1104.937031] sd 11:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg4 type 0
[ 1104.938166] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] 488397168 512-byte logical blocks: (250 GB/233 GiB)
[ 1104.939159] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] Write Protect is off
[ 1104.939165] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] Mode Sense: 28 00 00 00
[ 1104.940154] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] No Caching mode page found
[ 1104.940158] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] Assuming drive cache: write through
[ 1104.948053] sdd:
[ 1104.951038] sd 11:0:0:0: [sdd] Attached SCSI disk
[ 1105.150165] EXT4-fs (sdd): no journal found
[ 1124.237071] EXT4-fs (sdd): no journal found