[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160406110803.GI2906@worktop>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 13:08:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tglx@...utronix.de, efault@....de, htejun@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tj@...nel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, zhaolei@...fujitsu.com,
yangds.fnst@...fujitsu.com, hpa@...or.com,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Split usage accounting into
user_usage and sys_usage
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 08:32:19PM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > > void cpuacct_charge(struct task_struct *tsk, u64 cputime)
> > > > {
> > > > struct cpuacct *ca;
> > > > + int index;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (user_mode(task_pt_regs(tsk)))
> > > > + index = CPUACCT_USAGE_USER;
> > > > + else
> > > > + index = CPUACCT_USAGE_SYSTEM;
>
> This is oopsing because PowerPC task_pt_regs() returns NULL for
> kernel threads.
Ah, so sometihng like:
struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs();
int index = CPUACCT_USAGE_SYSTEM;
if (regs && user_mode(regs))
index = CPUACCT_USAGE_USER;
should work, right?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists