Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Well, my observation is that both softlockup and the scheduler really
>> want to measure unstolen time, so it seemed to me that sched_clock was
>> a nice common place to implement that, rather than implementing a
>> whole new time interface. At the time that seemed OK, and nobody had
>> any objections.
>>
>
> yeah. But then it should not be using sched_clock() but CFS's new
> rq_clock() method - which does try to construct a globally valid
> timesource out of sched_clock(). [that fix is not backportable though]
>
Hm, that doesn't look quite right. Doesn't rq_clock measure time spent
running? Unstolen time includes idle time too (it just excludes time in
which a VCPU is runnable but not actually running).
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
