On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 10:03 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 08/18/2014 12:44 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 19:50 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> On 08/16, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>>
> >>> + do {
> >>> + seq = nextseq;
> >>> + read_seqbegin_or_lock(&sig->stats_
On 08/18/2014 12:44 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 19:50 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 08/16, Rik van Riel wrote:
+ do {
+ seq = nextseq;
+ read_seqbegin_or_lock(&sig->stats_lock, &seq);
+ times->utime = sig->utime;
+
On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 19:50 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/16, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > + do {
> > + seq = nextseq;
> > + read_seqbegin_or_lock(&sig->stats_lock, &seq);
> > + times->utime = sig->utime;
> > + times->stime = sig->stime;
> > +
On 08/16, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> + do {
> + seq = nextseq;
> + read_seqbegin_or_lock(&sig->stats_lock, &seq);
> + times->utime = sig->utime;
> + times->stime = sig->stime;
> + times->sum_exec_runtime = sig->sum_sched_runtime;
> +
> +
On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 16:11:59 +0200
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Rik, I do not understand why did you silently ignore my comments about
> this change twice ;)
Here is the version I have actually been running my latest
tests with. This one addresses the forward progress issue
you pointed out.
---8<---
5 matches
Mail list logo