[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070511125132.93a4abdd.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:51:32 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@...hat.com>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tsmetana@...hat.com, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use boot based time for process start time and boot
time in /proc
On Fri, 11 May 2007 10:45:31 +0200
Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:40:47PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > @@ -445,12 +445,14 @@ static int show_stat(struct seq_file *p, void *v)
> > > unsigned long jif;
> > > cputime64_t user, nice, system, idle, iowait, irq, softirq, steal;
> > > u64 sum = 0;
> > > + struct timespec boottime;
> > >
> > > user = nice = system = idle = iowait =
> > > irq = softirq = steal = cputime64_zero;
> > > - jif = - wall_to_monotonic.tv_sec;
> > > - if (wall_to_monotonic.tv_nsec)
> > > - --jif;
> > > + getboottime(&boottime);
> > > + jif = boottime.tv_sec;
> > > + if (boottime.tv_nsec)
> > > + ++jif;
> > >
> >
> > Is the switch from --jif to ++jif a functional change? If so, how come?
>
> Yes, I'm afraid it was.
>
> -----------------------
> From: Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@...hat.com>
> Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 10:34:55 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Lower the boot time to seconds, not ceil
>
> Restores the original behaviour of boot time calculation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@...hat.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Tomas Smetana <tsmetana@...hat.com>
> Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
> ---
> fs/proc/proc_misc.c | 2 --
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_misc.c b/fs/proc/proc_misc.c
> index d84956c..60b6210 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/proc_misc.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/proc_misc.c
> @@ -452,8 +452,6 @@ static int show_stat(struct seq_file *p, void *v)
> irq = softirq = steal = cputime64_zero;
> getboottime(&boottime);
> jif = boottime.tv_sec;
> - if (boottime.tv_nsec)
> - ++jif;
>
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> int j;
So we've gone from --jif to ++jif to no change at all.
Are you sure that this net removal of --jif is correct?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists