From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752884AbXKSHqL (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:46:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750988AbXKSHp6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:45:58 -0500 Received: from etc.kandalaya.org ([83.143.86.98]:53812 "EHLO images.kandalaya.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750914AbXKSHp5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:45:57 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 979 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:45:57 EST From: Raj Mathur Reply-To: raju@linux-delhi.org Organization: Kandalaya To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Query on kernel metrics available Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:59:26 +0530 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711191259.26502.raju@linux-delhi.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org A competing OS vendor is claiming that the Linux kernel has no way to measure the following: a. Time spent waiting for page faults in percent b. Total transfer time for each auxiliary memory in percent c. Time in percent when one or more tasks were blocked waiting for memory resources d. Time spent waiting for page faults in percent I was wondering if the claims were pure FUD or are measurements possible -- whether they are actually implemented or not is not important (at least at this stage). Apologies if the descriptions aren't very precise; OTOH that leaves us room to interpret the claims in a favourable (to us) manner :) TIA and regards, -- Raju -- Raj Mathur raju@kandalaya.org http://kandalaya.org/ Freedom in Technology & Software || February 2008 || http://freed.in/ GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5 0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F PsyTrance & Chill: http://schizoid.in/ || It is the mind that moves