[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45F85BBB.70707@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:31:55 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Dan Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>
CC: dwalker@...sta.com, cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, paulus@...ibm.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Stolen and degraded time and schedulers
Dan Hecht wrote:
> Sounds good. I don't see this in your patchset you sent yesterday
> though; did you add it after sending out those patches?
Yes.
> if so, could you forward the new patch? does it explicitly prevent
> stolen time from getting accounted as user/system time or does it
> just rely on NO_HZ mode sort of happening to work that way (since the
> one shot timer is skipped ahead for missed ticks)?
Hm, not sure. It doesn't care how often it gets called; it just
accumulates results up to that point, but I'm not sure if the time would
get double accounted. Perhaps it doesn't matter when using
xen_sched_clock().
Did the get_scheduled_time -> sched_clock make sense to you?
J
View attachment "xen-stolen-time.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (3983 bytes)
View attachment "xen-sched-clock.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (2223 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists