[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrV-J1dc-gmqq+-dJUQsiR2Va-zHF2mgij73cd6e1LnN4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 08:06:49 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
fweisbec@...hat.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 11/11] nohz,kvm,time: teach account_process_tick about
guest time
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 7:58 AM, <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
>
> When tick based accounting is run from a remote CPU, it is actually
> possible to encounter a task with PF_VCPU set. Make sure to account
> those as guest time.
Why do we have PF_VCPU and CONTEXT_GUEST? What's the difference
between them (other than the fact that one is per-task and one is
per-cpu)? It would be a bit easier to understand if there were fewer
of these things.
If the issue is that remote sampling would otherwise have a race that
could account guest time to the wrong task, then maybe PF_VCPU makes
sense. Hmm.
--Andy
--
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