[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141201154128.2cbe08b0@mschwide>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 15:41:28 +0100
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 24/30] cputime: Increment kcpustat directly on
irqtime account
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 19:23:54 +0100
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> The irqtime is accounted is nsecs and stored in
> cpu_irq_time.hardirq_time and cpu_irq_time.softirq_time. Once the
> accumulated amount reaches a new jiffy, this one gets accounted to the
> kcpustat.
>
> This was necessary when kcpustat was stored in cputime_t, which could at
> worst have a jiffies granularity. But now kcpustat is stored in nsecs
> so this whole discretization game with temporary irqtime storage has
> become unnecessary.
>
> We can now directly account the irqtime to the kcpustat.
Isn't the issue here that two different approaches to cputime accounting
get mixed here? On the one hand a cputime_t based on jiffies and on the
other CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING which uses sched_clock_cpu() to create
the accounting deltas.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
--
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