Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 31 Jan 2023 20:59:05 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] tick/nohz: fix data races in get_cpu_idle_time_us() |
| |
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:35:39PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > Seriously this procfs accuracy is the least of the problems and if this > > would be the only issue then we could trivially fix it by declaring that > > the procfs output might go backwards. > > Declarations on l-k are meaningless.
Not really, we often do the -EWONTFIX thing.
> > If there would be a real reason to ensure monotonicity there then we could > > easily do that in the readout code. > > People expect it to be monotonic. I wrote this test fully expecting > that /proc/uptime is monotonic. It didn't ever occured to me that > idletime can go backwards (nor uptime, but uptime is not buggy).
People want ponies too -- people will just have to cope with not having ponies.
| |