Currently Being ModeratedJun 25, 2011 4:21 PM (in response to DChabot)
Well I've been keeping an eye on mine and it hasn't gotten too crazy yet. I guess it also depends on how much ram you have as well. I only have 4, and kernel_task never runs more than 900MB (after about a week or two use without shutdown)
@wyager, im guessing you have 8GB of ram? or just 4?
Currently Being ModeratedJul 2, 2011 2:20 PM (in response to DChabot)
Has the Thunderbolt Firmware update helped this issue for anyone else? On my MBP, kernel_task was taking up ~600 MB after restarts, but "just" ~480 MB after updating.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 2, 2011 4:06 PM (in response to davebwells)
Currently Being ModeratedJul 10, 2011 8:02 AM (in response to wyager)
Currently Being ModeratedJul 10, 2011 11:38 AM (in response to DChabot)
no new news. just waiting until Lion comes out.
I wonder if people who have the sandy bridge in the new iMacs are having this same problem?
Currently Being ModeratedJul 11, 2011 5:10 AM (in response to LSUAMDG)
Same behavior on a newly purchased MBP, 8GB RAM.
The amount of RAM doesn't concern me, it seems that the kernel uses its own algorithm for allocating it.
It is the constant CPU consumption that makes me suspect something is not optimal.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 11, 2011 11:52 AM (in response to rares.azoth)
Care to elaborate, rares.azoth? Most processes don't use an "algorithm" for allocating RAM-they just allocate it dynamically, whenever they create or release an object. How much CPU is your using? Mine sticks around 1-5%. IMO, a few percent of 1/8th of the processor is pretty good.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 11, 2011 3:23 PM (in response to wyager)
kernel_task is not a regular process, it is a reporting task that represents specific kernel activities, such as allocating and releasing memory pages, task scheduling etc.
To my understanding (see apple documentation ) the amount of memory that you see in the Real Memory column of this particular process (kernel_task) includes memory pages that are releasable by the kernel (under a LRU policy) when required (by other processes).
If you add another column (Private Memory) in Activity Monitor you will actually find the memory that is allocated to that specific process alone. (in my case is 50 MB).
On my machine, the CPU consumption of the kernel_task "process" and its threads averages at 3-4% which only started to happen after upgrading to 10.6.7. It is too high and in my opinion indicative that something is not going well, perhaps a kext is not functioning well. Curious to measure it after doing a clean install of Lion in the following days.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 11, 2011 6:10 PM (in response to rares.azoth)
Sure, but it doesn't really plan out its ram use... it just drops whatever it's not using anymore (under LRU policy, like you said).
My kernel_task has 167 megs of private ram, and "only" 470 megs real memory. Our processes seem to be using RAM differently.
FYI, none of the loaded kexts on my computer seem to be using using more than a few megs of ram. Kextstat and USB Prober will tell you how much RAM each loaded kext is using.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 21, 2011 12:18 PM (in response to DChabot)
So anyone get 10.7 yet? If so, does it have any effect?
Currently Being ModeratedJul 21, 2011 12:24 PM (in response to LSUAMDG)
Currently Being ModeratedJul 21, 2011 5:52 PM (in response to rodknocker)
Bummer! I'm downloading it from the app store right now, I'll see if it makes any difference. Lately, however, I haven't noticed k_t taking up more than 600 megs, so maybe a recent update helped me a bit. Still too much, of course.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 21, 2011 11:46 PM (in response to wyager)
In my post from 10.07.2011, my MBP had 4 GB installed. With Lion GM.
Memory usage around 500-600 MB.
On 20.07.2011 i upgraded to 8 GB.
As you can see the kernel_task memory usage growed up to 800-950 MB.
For me it looks like this: The more RAM i install, the more ram takes the kernel_task
Currently Being ModeratedJul 22, 2011 12:14 AM (in response to DChabot)
No help. Maybe a little worse, actually... Oh well, at least they added a little more hardware support to Lion. OpenCL now works on the new MBPs as far as I can tell.
Currently Being ModeratedJul 22, 2011 12:17 AM (in response to wyager)
Maybe we could try to boot into 32-bit kernel?
More Like This
- Retrieving data ...
- This solved my question - 10 points
- This helped me - 5 points