[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1284895291.2275.617.camel@laptop>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 13:21:31 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING, finer accounting of CPU
irq time
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 18:56 -0700, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> +void account_system_vtime(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + int cpu;
> + u64 now, delta;
> +
> + if (!sched_clock_irqtime)
> + return;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> +
> + cpu = task_cpu(tsk);
> + now = sched_clock();
> + delta = now - per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu);
> + per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu) = now;
> + if (hardirq_count())
> + per_cpu(cpu_hardirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> + else if (softirq_count())
> + per_cpu(cpu_softirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> +
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +}
This seems to suggest you count time double if a hardirq hits while
we're doing softirqs, but being as this is an incomplete api its very
hard to tell indeed.
--
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