From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>, Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>
Subject: Re: Incorrect CPU process accounting using CONFIG_HZ=100
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:29:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060629072915.GE27526@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44A31DE8.20100@bigpond.net.au>
Hi!
> >>>Wouldn't merging the two approaches be in the interest of conserving
> >>>cpu resources, while at the same time reflecting an accurate view of
> >>>cpu utilization?
> >>
> >>I think that this would be a worthwhile endeavour once/if
> >>sched_clock() is fixed. This is especially the case as CPUs get
> >>faster as many tasks may run to completion in less than a tick.
> >
> >That may not be as simple as it seems. To properly account system v user
> >time using the sched_clock we'd have to hook into arch dependant asm
> >code to know when entering and exiting kernel context. That is far more
> >invasive than the simple on/off runqueue timing we currently do for
> >scheduling accounting.
>
> Yes, it is a problem and we may have to do something approximate like
> counting ticks for sys time and subtracting that from the total to get
> user time when reporting the times to user space (only a bit more
> complex to make sure we don't end up with negative times).
Yes, please.
> How is it intended to handle this problem in the tickless kernel?
Even our "tickless" kernels do tick while CPU is busy.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-29 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-21 14:16 Al Boldi
2006-06-22 5:46 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-06-22 17:36 ` Al Boldi
2006-06-26 16:02 ` Pavel Machek
2006-06-27 12:32 ` Al Boldi
2006-06-27 13:02 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-27 23:52 ` Peter Williams
2006-06-28 20:06 ` Al Boldi
2006-06-28 23:23 ` Peter Williams
2006-06-28 23:46 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-29 0:25 ` Peter Williams
2006-06-29 1:10 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-29 7:29 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060629072915.GE27526@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=a1426z@gawab.com \
--cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®