Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] Account ksoftirqd time as cpustat softirq -v1 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:33:52 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 15:30 -0700, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote: > softirq time in ksoftirqd context is not accounted in ns granularity > per cpu softirq stats, as we want that to be a part of ksoftirqd > exec_runtime. > > Accounting them as softirq on /proc/stat separately. > > Tested-by: Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com> > > Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com> > --- > kernel/sched.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c > index 49f6f61..0955050 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched.c > +++ b/kernel/sched.c > @@ -3617,6 +3617,14 @@ static void irqtime_account_process_tick(struct task_struct *p, int user_tick, > cpustat->irq = cputime64_add(cpustat->irq, tmp); > } else if (irqtime_account_si_update()) { > cpustat->softirq = cputime64_add(cpustat->softirq, tmp); > + } else if (this_cpu_ksoftirqd() == p) { > + /* > + * ksoftirqd time do not get accounted in cpu_softirq_time. > + * So, we have to handle it separately here. > + * Also, p->stime needs to be updated for ksoftirqd. > + */ > + __account_system_time(p, cputime_one_jiffy, one_jiffy_scaled, > + &cpustat->softirq); > } else if (user_tick) { > account_user_time(p, cputime_one_jiffy, one_jiffy_scaled); > } else if (p == rq->idle) {
I'm somewhat confused by this patch.. This is significantly different from the thing proposed last time around, which was to use:
cpustat->softirq + this_cpu_ksoftirqd()->se.sum_exec_runtime
The above looses the fine grained aspect of the accounting and simply charges a whole jiffy if the current process happens to be ksoftirqd.
| |