Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 31 Mar 2006 00:27:36 -0500 | | From | Shailabh Nagar <> | | Subject | Re: [Patch 0/8] per-task delay accounting |
| |
Peter Chubb wrote:
>>>>>>"Shailabh" == Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>> > > > >Shailabh> To this list we can also add > >Shailabh> Microstate accounting Peter Chubb >Shailabh> <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au> I don't know if Peter is still >Shailabh> interested in pursuing this or it was rejected. > >It's still maintained in a sporadic sort of way --- I update it when >either I need it for something, or someone's downloaded it and asks >why it doesn't work agains kernel X.Y.Z. I see a few downloads a >month. > > So do you intend to pursue acceptance ? If so, do you think the netlink-based taskstats interface provided by the delay accounting patches could be an acceptable substitute for the interfaces you had (from an old lkml post, they appear to be /proc/tgid/msa and a syscall based one) ?
>My microstate accounting patch overlaps the delay accounting patch quite a >lot in functionality, (but I thnk mine is cleaner except for interrupt >time accounting... which the delay accounting patch doesn't do. I >wanted to know how much time a thread *really* had on the processor, >subtracting off the time spent in interrupt handlers for some other >process). > > Thanks. Will incorporate into a note on the mechanisms of the other accounting patches.
--Shailabh
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |