CPU Usage (build 498)

Go To Last Post
12 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Hi all,

I have AVRStudio 4.12 sp4 (build 498) installed on a Celeron 2GHz, 1G ram, WinXP pro. I know it isn't the highest spec computer out there but AVRStudio pulls between 20 and 40% cpu usage without even having a project open, let alone actually doing anything. To verify this I have killed all but critical processes and AVRStudio; the same thing happens. If you're debugging or something this peaks to about 70%. This is OK if it's the only program open but, for example, I was doing some AVR work in AVRStudio while compiling a GCC with AVR32 support (through Cygwin) in the background. Not only did the computer turn to a ball of crud, but the GCC build took 3 hours where it usually takes about 45mins to an hour.

If this is normal behavior, then it seems a bit wierd but I'll live with it. But that's the thing, is it normal behavior?

Cheers,
S.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I've noticed the huge amount of CPU that Studio eats to. Lord alone knows why. But it seems like "normal" behaviour.

Cliff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I just upgraded my hardware, so I have a fresh AVRstudio build 498 install and I have not added any C complier to it yet. On Win 2000 Pro using the Task Manager to monitor CPU usage I got an all time peak of 52 % when starting the program. It drops back to 0 % when I'm not doing anything in ARVstudio. Debugging in single step on a JTAGICE MKII spiked up to 14 % on startup and was then 8 % per F11 step or less afterwards (0 % on idle). Building an assembly program was even less of a CPU load. It reported 3506/3902 Handles, 229/240 Threads and 23/24 processes (before/after starting AVRstudio).

I did notice the old install/computer appeared to step slower when debugging assembler with an open memory view window. The new computer upgrade doesn't seem to slow down noticeably.

Maybe XP has an issue that 2000 does not have, some plug-in complier is eating resources or my new dual processor is magic :)? I do not ever use any Windows OS on the Internet, so there is no virus checker installed. I consistently got 0 % CPU load reported when not doing anything in AVRstudio (with AVRstudio running of course). I cannot reproduce the AVRstudio “idle” CPU loads you are seeing.

edit: I had a typo in the build number that was correctd

Last Edited: Tue. Nov 7, 2006 - 06:00 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'm using W2K too.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

My poor baby 800 MHz Pentium III is running WXP, SP2 with all updates. AVRStudio 4 SP4 is currently minimized and is taking 2-4% of the machine.

I don't think it's the OS. No clue what it might be, though.

Stu

Engineering seems to boil down to: Cheap. Fast. Good. Choose two. Sometimes choose only one.

Newbie? Be sure to read the thread Newbie? Start here!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Interesting... Could it be the WinAVR plugin? @clawson, stu_san: Do you have the AVR GCC plugin installed? Mike B cannot replicate the CPU usage without this plugin, albeit on a different OS, so maybe it's this?

S.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Yes I use the GCC plugin in Studio so maybe it's that. I would disable it (though I'm not sure if that's possible without looking) to see what difference it makes but I don't really want to change my Studio environment because it works nicely at the moment (if a little CPU-hungry)

Cliff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Suspecting a complier plug-in is only pure speculation. If Stu also uses GCC it would tend to discount it as a suspect.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

squidgit wrote:
Interesting... Could it be the WinAVR plugin? @clawson, stu_san: Do you have the AVR GCC plugin installed?

Yes, I use the GCC plugin -- I have roughly 47000 lines of C code!

I tend not to use the simulator, I do use the AVR JTAGICE mkII.

In a previous life I remember a similar problem with M$ Visual Studio 6. Turned out is was a registry setting that needed tweaking. I'll see if I can remember it...

Stu

Edit 1: Changed response to make it clearer. Yes we have no bananas!

Engineering seems to boil down to: Cheap. Fast. Good. Choose two. Sometimes choose only one.

Newbie? Be sure to read the thread Newbie? Start here!

Last Edited: Thu. Nov 9, 2006 - 06:18 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I have the GCC plugin also and I don't have any issues with CPU usage, max around 20% during simulation and 0 to 1 doing nothing.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

The problem is not the operating system type (Win 2000 Pro or Win XP), AVRstudio build 498 or GCC. That leaves the possibility that one of the above may have become unstable or developed problems. In installs that have the high CPU usage problem, reboot the system (to reset the reported process times), start up AVRstudio, quickly check to verify the high usage still exists and let the computer sit for awhile so you can check the cumulative CPU time per process usage in the process table. See if some particular process is racking more CPU time than the others (other than the system process). If AVR studio is racking up more time then something is happening that does not reproduce easily.

If AVRstudio is not the culprit maybe you will get a clue from the reported CPU times. You might be able to identify the responsible process.

Try the above experiment running as Administrator. I have noticed AVRstudio does not clean-up the user registry copy completely after an uninstall. Maybe your user registry copy has developed conflicts or problems (this is pure speculation, but worth checking). The Admin registry does appear to clean up properly, so if the problem goes away running under Admin then you may have found a problem.

Check your memory usage before and after starting AVRstudio. Maybe something is going on that is causing unwanted swap file activity when AVRstudio is started.

If you upgrade a major version of AVRstudio (i.e. not a service pack) and do not uninstall the original/old AVRstudio version first, it can do some pretty strange things. I do not know if the high CPU load is one of them or not.

If nothing else is found, the usual suspects are:

Windows bit rot. Mature Windows installations seem to go bad over time. They become less stable, slower, etc., and require a new installation to fix it. This may literally take years to become a problem. This is not a researched and verified fact, just a consensus of many IT and other computer people. I never found out why, but I suspect the registry can get fairly messed up over long periods of time and use.

Trojans, worms, viruses, malware. Of course any of these can be the problem. They used to be easy to find, however &$^@$%* Sony Inc. released a Windows root tool kit that is now being used as a template by scum that are not even capable of writing a root tool themselves (now root tools are a growing problem). Root tools hide themselves from the file explorer and process reporting making finding the trojans, worms, viruses and malware they carry extremely difficult. I try to thank Sony every time I avoid purchasing one of their products. Win XP users should be aware the default user account created during the OS install runs with Administrator privileges. Running this user account is convenient for installing new software, but it makes it slightly easier for trojans, worms, viruses and malware to enter your computer.

I guess it would also make sense to try running a CPU usage test under the default Win XP user account if AVRstudio was installed from there (to look for registry related problems).

Any other ideas?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Cheers Mike B, very detailed! Earlier today I went to open AVRStudio, the splash screen comes up, disappears, but the main GUI never appears. The process kept running, there was just nothing visible! Anyway, I have managed to convince the boss that I need a faster computer (I'm doing some FPGA work whose minimum sys req.s include 1.5GB ram!) so I'll just nuke the HDD from orbit and start again.

Thanks for all your responses everyone,
S.