lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] cpuacct: VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING don't prevent percpu cputime count
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:11:15 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

>
> Changelog:
> since v1
> - use percpu_counter_sum() instead percpu_counter_read()
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> Subject: [PATCH v2] cpuacct: VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING don't prevent percpu cputime count
>
> cpuacct_update_stats() is called at every tick updating. and it use percpu_counter
> for avoiding performance degression.
>
> For archs which define VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING, every tick would result
> in >1000 units of cputime updates and since this is much much greater
> than percpu_batch_counter, we end up taking spinlock on every tick.
>
> This patch change batch rule. now, any cpu can store "percpu_counter_bach * jiffies"
> cputime in per-cpu cache.
> it mean this patch don't have behavior change if VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=n.

Does this actually matter?

If we're calling cpuacct_update_stats() with large values of `cputime'
then presumably we're also calling cpuacct_update_stats() at a low
frequency, so the common lock-taking won't cause performance problems?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-01 03:21    [W:0.244 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site