[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110208121144.GA7550@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 13:11:44 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: /proc/<pid>/sched should contain cumulative data for all
threads in process
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 16:29 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We've got a tool that gathers lots of scheduling data for each process
> > (not task/thread) on the system.
> >
> > For /proc/<pid>/{stat,io} this is straightforward, as the per-thread
> > values are summed together for the process as a whole.
> >
> > However, /proc/<pid>/sched only shows the data for the individual thread
> > with the same tid as the pid. To get a per-process view we need to
> > manually scan all the threads and sum them--and this can get expensive
> > due to all the extra file operations, parsing, etc.
> >
> > Was this a concious design decision, or just an oversight? Would a
> > patch converting it to whole-process values be accepted or is it enough
> > of a standard interface that we can't break existing apps that expect
> > the current behaviour?
>
> I'd as soon remove all that stuff than extend it, its an abi liability,
> esp since you're talking about tools parsing this stuff.
So assuming a tool would want to capture such stats of the system, what would be its
options? Could we do all this via system-wide counters and perf stat alike cheap,
transparent gathering without having to patch/rebuild the kernel?
Thanks,
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