lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Mar]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: question about logic of steal_account_process_tick() ?
On 03/04/2016 01:51 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:

> The thing is, steal_account_process_tick() returns units of cputime, which I
> think is nanoseconds on x86_64. So if we have a tiny amount of stolen time it
> seems like that will prevent a whole tick from being accounted into
> user/system/idle.
>
> I feel like I must be missing something here, can someone tell me what it is?

Looking at commit dee08a72 (from 2014) it seems like the units of the return
value of steal_account_process_tick() changed from ticks to cputime_t. I don't
see an equivalent change in the logic in account_process_tick(), which seems to
assume that a nonzero return value in steal_account_process_tick() means a whole
tick has been stolen.

Was there a change to make paravirt_steal_clock() increment in ticks? If not it
seems like there's a unit mismatch here.

Chris

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-03-04 22:21    [W:0.059 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site