[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091207073043.GH10868@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 08:30:43 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Xiao Guangrong <ericxiao.gr@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
T??r??k Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf/sched: fix for getting task's execution time
* Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> In current code, task's execute time is got by reading
> '/proc/<pid>/sched' file, it's wrong if the task is created
> by pthread_create(), because every thread task has same pid.
>
> This way also has two demerits:
>
> 1: 'perf sched replay' can't work if the kernel not compile with
> 'CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG' option
> 2: perf tool should depend on proc file system
>
> So, this patch call getrusage() to get task's execution time instead
> of reading /proc file
ok, that's better than /proc, but how about using
PERF_COUNT_SW_TASK_CLOCK instead of rusage, to recover the CPU time
used? It would be more precise, and it would use the perf API. (Some
helper functions in tools/perf/lib/ would be nice to make it as easy to
use as rusage (or even easier if possible).)
Ingo
--
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