Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:05:14 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] remove rq->lock from cpuacct cgroup v2 | From | Bharata B Rao <> |
| |
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 2:16 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 17:20:05 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:24:43 +0530 >> Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@gmail.com> wrote: >> At first, generic per-cpu counter sounds interesting but to be honest, >> some special handling is used for cpuacct based on its characteristic. >> >> - Writer works under non-preemptable context. >> - There is only one writer. >> > If utime/stime updates works on above context, using the same code will be good.
IIUC, utime/stime updates also work under the above conditions.
> > I don't use any cpuacct structure specific in routines... > If you want me to rewrite it, I'll do. please request what you want.
After looking deep into your patch, I think I could use the same seq counter introduced by you to update stime/utime also. I guess I could use most part of your code except there is a slight difference wrt preemption disabled assumption in the write path. cpusuage updates happen under rq->lock but stime/utime updates don't. So I probably can't use cpuacct_start/end_counter_update as is.
Regards, Bharata. -- http://bharata.sulekha.com/blog/posts.htm -- 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/
| |