linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for testing] Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <470562B9.6060200@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 04 Oct 2007 18:01:29 -0400
From:	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC:	Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@...il.com>,
	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>,
	"Alexander E. Patrakov" <patrakov@....usu.ru>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for testing] Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top

On 10/04/2007 05:10 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:

> <patch reverting to 2.6.22 behavior>

Alternative patch:

procfs: Don't read runtime twice when computing task's stime

Current code reads p->se.sum_exec_runtime twice and goes through
multiple type conversions to calculate stime. Read it once and
skip some of the conversions.

Signed-off-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>

--- linux-2.6.23-rc6-dell.orig/fs/proc/array.c
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc6-dell/fs/proc/array.c
@@ -334,39 +334,38 @@ static cputime_t task_stime(struct task_
 	return p->stime;
 }
 #else
-static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_struct *p)
+static clock_t __task_utime(struct task_struct *p, u64 runtime)
 {
 	clock_t utime = cputime_to_clock_t(p->utime),
 		total = utime + cputime_to_clock_t(p->stime);
-	u64 temp;
 
 	/*
 	 * Use CFS's precise accounting:
 	 */
-	temp = (u64)nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime);
-
 	if (total) {
-		temp *= utime;
-		do_div(temp, total);
+		runtime *= utime;
+		do_div(runtime, total);
 	}
-	utime = (clock_t)temp;
+	return (clock_t)runtime;
+}
 
-	return clock_t_to_cputime(utime);
+static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+	u64 runtime = (u64)nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime);
+
+	return clock_t_to_cputime(__task_utime(p, runtime));
 }
 
 static cputime_t task_stime(struct task_struct *p)
 {
-	clock_t stime;
+	u64 runtime = (u64)nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime);
 
 	/*
 	 * Use CFS's precise accounting. (we subtract utime from
 	 * the total, to make sure the total observed by userspace
 	 * grows monotonically - apps rely on that):
 	 */
-	stime = nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime) -
-			cputime_to_clock_t(task_utime(p));
-
-	return clock_t_to_cputime(stime);
+	return clock_t_to_cputime(runtime - __task_utime(p, runtime));
 }
 #endif
 

-
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/