In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>
> >>unsigned int rt_priority;
> >> - cputime_t utime, stime;
> >> + cputime_t utime, stime, utimescaled, stimescaled;
> >
> > Adding 8 or 16 bytes to the task_struct for all architectures for something
> > which only p
Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> unsigned int rt_priority;
>> -cputime_t utime, stime;
>> +cputime_t utime, stime, utimescaled, stimescaled;
>
> Adding 8 or 16 bytes to the task_struct for all architectures for something
> which only powerpc uses?
>
> Is there any prospect that other CPU
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:09:41 +1000
> Michael Neuling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> This adds items to the taststats struct to account for user and system
>> time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue rates.
>>
>> Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled ca
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:09:41 +1000
Michael Neuling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This adds items to the taststats struct to account for user and system
> time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue rates.
>
> Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled callbacks which architectures
>
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 08:22:40AM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Linas Vepstas writes:
>
> > My gut impression (maybe wrong?) is that the scaled time is,
> > in a certain sense, "more accurate" than the unscaled time.
>
> The "unscaled" time is just time, as in "how many seconds did this
> task
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Michael Neuling wrote:
> >> I'd also request for you to add a cpu_scaled_run_real_total for use
> >> by delay accounting. cpu_scaled_run_real_total should be similar in
> >> functionality to cpu_run_real_total.
> >
> > Will do. Should I add cpu_scaled_r
Michael Neuling wrote:
>> I'd also request for you to add a cpu_scaled_run_real_total for use
>> by delay accounting. cpu_scaled_run_real_total should be similar in
>> functionality to cpu_run_real_total.
>
> Will do. Should I add cpu_scaled_run_real_total to the end of the
> struct taskstat, or
This adds items to the taststats struct to account for user and system
time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue rates.
Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled callbacks which architectures
can use to account for time using this mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <[EMAIL
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Hi, Michael,
>
> Thanks for doing this, this is really useful.
>
> Michael Neuling wrote:
> > This adds two items to the taststats struct to account for user and
> > system time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue
> > rates.
> >
Linas Vepstas writes:
> My gut impression (maybe wrong?) is that the scaled time is,
> in a certain sense, "more accurate" than the unscaled time.
The "unscaled" time is just time, as in "how many seconds did this
task spend on the CPU". It's what all the tools (except a certain
proprietary work
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 05:09:22PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
> This adds two items to the taststats struct to account for user and
> system time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue
> rates.
>
> Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled callbacks which architectures
> can use
Hi, Michael,
Thanks for doing this, this is really useful.
Michael Neuling wrote:
> This adds two items to the taststats struct to account for user and
> system time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue
> rates.
>
> Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled callbacks which archi
This adds two items to the taststats struct to account for user and
system time based on scaling the CPU frequency and instruction issue
rates.
Adds account_(user|system)_time_scaled callbacks which architectures
can use to account for time using this mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <[E
13 matches
Mail list logo
