[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070719154820.GM2216@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:18:20 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Jan Glauber <jang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
mschwid2@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, efault@....de,
dmitry.adamushko@...il.com, paulus@...ba.org, anton@...ba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtual sched_clock() for s390
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 08:29:06AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > - * Monotonic_clock - returns # of nanoseconds passed since time_init()
> > + * Scheduler clock - returns current time in nanosec units.
> > + * Now based on virtual cpu time to only account time the guest
> > + * was actually running.
> >
>
> Runn*ing*? Does it include time the VCPU spends idle/blocked? If not,
> then the scheduler won't be able to tell how long a process has been
> asleep.
Good point ..
I think we need a measure of both virtual and real time here -
virtual for accounting task-execution time and real for
accounting sleep (and perhaps rq-wait?) time.
> Maybe this doesn't matter (I had this problem in a version of
> Xen's sched_clock, and I can't say I saw an ill effects from it).
I guess it will show up as some corner case behaviour, which people are
yet to discover on virtual env.
--
Regards,
vatsa
-
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