Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vladimir Murzin
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:54:20 +0400
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "mm/vmalloc: interchage the implementation of
vmalloc_to_{pfn,page}"
This reverts commit ece86e222db48d04bda218a2be70e384518bb08c.
Despite being claimed that patch doesn't introduce any func
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Interesting, the idle time accounting (done from
account_system_time()) has not changed. Has your .config changed?
Could you please send it across. I've downloaded apc and I am trying
to reproduce your prob
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[..snip..]
Now integral load matches the one obtained via the "accurate" method.
However the report for individual cores are of
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[..snip..]
Now integral load matches the one obtained via the "accurate" method.
However the report for individual cores are of by around 20% percent.
I think I missed some of the c
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the alternating balancing might be due to an uneven number of tasks
perhaps? If you have 3 tasks on 2 cores then there's no other
solution to achieve even performance of each task but to rotate them
amongs
orrect, it's off by good 20 percent on each idividial
core.
(http://www.boblycat.org/~malc/apc/hog-cfs-v16.png)
Thought this information might be of some interest.
hm - what does 'hog' do, can i download hog.c from somewhere?
http://www.boblycat.org/~malc/apc/hog.c and also a
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 09:01, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 03:14, malc wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 01:19, malc wrote:
Erm... i just looked at the code and suddenly it stopped making any sense
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 01:19, malc wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
So before we go any further with this patch, can you try the following
one and see if this simple sanity check is enough?
Sure (compiling the kernel now), too bad old
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 00:57, malc wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 23:06, malc wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:46, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:34
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 23:06, malc wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:46, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:34, malc wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:46, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:34, malc wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For an rsdl 0.33 patched kernel. Comments? Overhead worth it?
[
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:46, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 25 March 2007 21:34, malc wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For an rsdl 0.33 patched kernel. Comments? Overhead worth it?
we want
ed
hog that produced this: http://www.boblycat.org/~malc/apc/load-c2d-hog.png
but this will have to wait till i get to the PC at work)
--
vale (this is not name/nick/alias, this is latin for farewell)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
From: Vassili Karpov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Describes how/when the information exported to `/proc/stat' is calculated,
and possible problems with this approach.
Signed-off-by: Vassili Karpov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/Documentation/cpu-load.txt b/Documentation/cpu-load.txt
new file mode 1
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
[..snip..]
The current situation ought to be documented. Better yet some flag
can
It probably _is_ documented, somewhere :-). If you find nice place
where to document it (top manpage?) go ahead with the patch.
How about this:
Looks okay to
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
[..snip..]
The current situation ought to be documented. Better yet some flag
can
It probably _is_ documented, somewhere :-). If you find nice place
where to document it (top manpage?) go ahead with the patch.
How about this:
CPU load
-
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 09:01, malc wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
[..snip..]
I have (had?) code that 'exploits' this. I believe I could eat 90% of cpu
without being noticed.
Slightly changed version of ho
ines in total changed) does that
easily on 2.6.18.3 on PPC.
http://www.boblycat.org/~malc/apc/load-hog-ppc.png
--
vale
-
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/majordom
to time how much
time is spent in the idle handler inside the kernel and exported this
information to the user-space. The results were consistent with our
expectations and the output of the test utility.
..
http://www.boblycat.org/~malc/apc
Vassili
Could you rewrite this code as a kernel
hog (n);
sigwait (&set, &i);
}
return 0;
}
/* end smallhog.c */
Might need some adjustment for a particular system but ran just fine here
on:
2.4.30 + Athlon tbird (1Ghz)
2.6.19.2 + Athlon X2 3800+ (2Ghz)
Showing next to zero load in top(1) and a whole lot more in APC.
http:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 12 February 2007 16:54, malc wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On 12/02/07, Vassili Karpov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[..snip..]
The kernel looks at what is using cpu _only_ during the timer
interrupt. Which means if y
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On 12/02/07, Vassili Karpov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[..snip..]
The kernel looks at what is using cpu _only_ during the timer
interrupt. Which means if your HZ is 1000 it looks at what is running
at precisely the moment those 1000 timer ticks occur.
22 matches
Mail list logo
