lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH for testing] Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top
Date
Am Freitag, 5. Oktober 2007 schrieb Frans Pop:
> On Thursday 04 October 2007, you wrote:
> > Frans can you test this patch if this makes stime and utime monotic
> > again?
> >
> > It basically reverts the rest of
> > b27f03d4bdc145a09fb7b0c0e004b29f1ee555fa and should restore the 2.6.22
> > behavior. The process time is used from tasks utime and stime instead of
> > the scheduler clock. That means, in general after a long period of time,
> > it is less accurate than the current time and behaves like 2.6.22.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
>
> Yes, this gives steady increases.
> For kontact it also again shows updates only once every minute. I really
> wonder where all the other fluctuations for contact come from with the
> alternative code.

Please correct me, if I am wrong, but here is my guess:

I think that the new code gives actually better numbers for kontact. Kontact
is using the cpu for very short periods, right? The old code updates utime
and stime via sampling at each timer tick. If kontact is scheduled based on
the timer tick(lets say timeout and a low amount of other interrupts) it will
start shortly after a tick. If kontact now manages to return the cpu before
the next tick, the old code would not account anything for kontact.
The new code instead, should be correct in terms of overall runtime as it
accounts the scheduled time in ns.

Why does it still shows numbers going backwards? I guess the sampled values
for stime and utime change in flight between task_utime and task_stime are
called. Lets say utime will be increased. Given the same sum_exec_runtime
that means that the result of task_stime() will get smaller at this point.

So Chucks patch only deals with sum_exec_runtime changing.

>
> It seems to me that this patch would be the best option for 2.6.23.

Ingo, do you have any opinion about how to proceed?

Christian
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-08 18:51    [W:0.330 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site