mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com>
To: Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com>
Cc: balbir@in.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>,
	Chris Sturtivant <csturtiv@sgi.com>, Tony Ernst <tee@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] add basic accounting fields to taskstats
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 14:23:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <44D7AF34.10301@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44CFCCE4.7060702@sgi.com>

Jay Lan wrote:

[snip]

>>
>>
>>> +    /* Each process gets a minimum of a half tick cpu time */
>>> +    if ((stats->ac_utime == 0) && (stats->ac_stime == 0)) {
>>> +        stats->ac_stime = USEC_PER_TICK/2;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>
>>
>>
>> This is confusing. Half tick does not make any sense from the
>> scheduler view point (or am I missing something?), so why
>> return half a tick to the user.
> 
> 
> It must be inherited from old code dated back to Cray UNICOS.
> I do not know if bad thing can happen if both utime and stime
> are less than 1 usec...  I guess not. But i agree that
> half a tick does not make sense. To play safe, we can change
> it to 1 usec if both utime and stime are sub microsecond.
> What do you think?

Hi Balbir,

I figured this out. The tsk->stime (and utime as well) are
charged by 1 tick (or cputime) from the timer interrupt handler
through update_process_times->account_{user,system}_time.

The clock resolution is a tick. Any short process less than
1 tick will the counter being 0. It can be from 0 to 0.99999...
tick. A half tick is the average value.

I think it makes more sense to assign a half tick than assign
1 usec to the stime. What do you think? Certainly the code need
better explanation.

Regards,
  - jay


[snip]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-08-07 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-31 19:20 Jay Lan
2006-07-31 20:23 ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-07-31 21:50   ` Jay Lan
2006-08-01 14:24 ` Balbir Singh
2006-08-01 21:51   ` Jay Lan
2006-08-02 15:31     ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-08-02 17:17       ` Balbir Singh
2006-08-02 17:37         ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-08-02 21:09         ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-02 23:47           ` Jay Lan
2006-08-03  3:02           ` Balbir Singh
2006-08-07 21:23     ` Jay Lan [this message]
2006-08-08  5:22       ` Balbir Singh
2006-08-08 16:40         ` Jay Lan
2006-08-08 14:57 Al Boldi

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=44D7AF34.10301@sgi.com \
    --to=jlan@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=balbir@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=csturtiv@sgi.com \
    --cc=jes@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nagar@watson.ibm.com \
    --cc=tee@sgi.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome