Am Samstag, 13. Oktober 2007 schrieb Frans Pop: > > > Please consider this patch for 2.6.23.2 > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/4/389 > > Is it already in Linus's tree? If so, do you have a git commit id? If > > not, please let us (stable@) know when it is, and what the id is, and > > then we can add it to our tree. > > Not AFAICT. > CCing Christian (as patch author) and Ingo (as author of the change that > caused the regression) so they can push it through the correct channels. >
I dont know how to proceed with this issue. The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that using sum_exec_runtime together with sampled utime and stime will never guarantee monotonicity for utime and stime in proc. Just imagine an process with 9 ticks for utime and 0 ticks for stime. If we now sample one tick for stime (but having only a small increase in sum_exec_runtime) the next utime value will only be 90% of the last value. So returning to the 2.6.22 model seems to be the safest solution until somebody else comes up with an idea that works proper. Ingo, any opinion? Christian - 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/