Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:43:50 + Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Patch makes available to the user the following
>> task and process performance statistics:
>> * Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
>> * Voluntary Context Switches (task
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:43:50 + Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Patch makes available to the user the following
> task and process performance statistics:
> * Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
> * Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct->nvcsw)
>
Changes:
Names are renamed to task_context_switch_rates.
Patch makes available to the user the following
task and process performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
* Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct->nvcsw)
Statisti
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 18:49:46 +
> Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> +void print_taskstats(struct taskstats *t)
>> +{
>> +printf("\n\nTask %15s%15s\n"
>> + " %15lu%15lu\n",
>> + "voluntary", "nonvoluntary",
>> + t->nvcsw
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 18:49:46 +
> Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Removed syscall counters from patch.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Patch makes available to the user the following
>> task and process performance statistics:
>> * Involuntary Context Switches (task_stru
Looking at the diffs below, I see context switch counters added. What is
actually being removed?
Jonathan
On Mon Jun 4 12:33:15 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Add Jonathan Lim to cc, who is working on CSA userland implementation
> to use the taskstats data that this patch is going to remov
Add Jonathan Lim to cc, who is working on CSA userland implementation
to use the taskstats data that this patch is going to remove.
Thanks,
- jay
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2007 18:49:46 +
> Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Removed syscall counters from patch.
>>
>>
On Wed, 30 May 2007 18:49:46 +
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Removed syscall counters from patch.
>
>
>
>
> Patch makes available to the user the following
> task and process performance statistics:
> * Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
> * Volun
Removed syscall counters from patch.
Patch makes available to the user the following
task and process performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
* Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct->nvcsw)
Statistics information is ava
On Tue, 22 May 2007 17:19:52 +
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for bothering you. I know you are very busy but could
> you please tell me what is situation of this patch?
I'd like to add the context-switch accounting to the taskstats payload.
As we'd then need to uprev the t
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 05:19:52PM +, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> diff --git a/include/asm-i386/thread_info.h b/include/asm-i386/thread_info.h
> index 4b187bb..bccfd6a 100644
> --- a/include/asm-i386/thread_info.h
> +++ b/include/asm-i386/thread_info.h
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ struct thread_info {
Hello Andrew,
Sorry for bothering you. I know you are very busy but could
you please tell me what is situation of this patch? You wrote
me you'll discuss it with someone about it and say can it be
accepted or not and in which form. As I understand the
situation all problems now are in syscal
Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/accounting/taskstats-struct.txt
> b/Documentation/accounting/taskstats-struct.txt
> index 661c797..606aef6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/accounting/taskstats-struct.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/accounting/taskstats-struct.txt
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ There a
Hello,
Thanks all for very useful comments.
Please review this version.
Best regards,
Maxim.
Patch makes available to the user the following
task and process performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
* Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct-
Andi Kleen wrote:
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This data is useful for detecting hyperactivity
patterns between processes.
You need a lot better rationale to slow down these important
fast paths. Particularly the syscall path is very hot.
Is this something that is really
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> This data is useful for detecting hyperactivity
> patterns between processes.
You need a lot better rationale to slow down these important
fast paths. Particularly the syscall path is very hot.
Is this something that is really generally useful? The co
I'm sending here the latest version of this patch.
Seems it was not on lkml mail list.
Patch makes available to the user the following
task and process performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
* Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct->nvcsw)
Hello Andrew,
I've added taskstats interface to that. Patch is attached.
Please also see my answers bellow.
Andrew Morton wrote:
(re-added lklml)
Patch makes available to the user the following
thread performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
* Volu
(re-added lklml)
> Patch makes available to the user the following
> thread performance statistics:
>* Involuntary Context Switches (task_struct->nivcsw)
>* Voluntary Context Switches (task_struct->nvcsw)
I suppose they might be useful, but I'd be interested in hearing what
the uses of t
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
On Sun 2007-04-15 03:21:57, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
nvcsw and nivcsw are conventional variable names for these quantities.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 08:10:24PM +, Pavel Machek wrote:
I can't decipher them and would not want users see them in /
On Sun 2007-04-15 03:21:57, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> nvcsw and nivcsw are conventional variable names for these quantities.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 08:10:24PM +, Pavel Machek wrote:
> I can't decipher them and would not want users see them in /proc.
> Would nonvoluntary_ctxt_switch be t
Hi!
On Sun 2007-04-15 03:21:57, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> At some point in the past, someone's attribution was stripped from:
Maxim's.
> >> + return buffer + sprintf(buffer, "Nvcsw:\t%lu\n"
> >> + "Nivcsw:\t%lu\n",
> >> + p->nvcsw,
>
At some point in the past, someone's attribution was stripped from:
>> + return buffer + sprintf(buffer, "Nvcsw:\t%lu\n"
>> + "Nivcsw:\t%lu\n",
>> + p->nvcsw,
>> + p->nivcsw);
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 09:47:07AM +00
Hi!
> + return buffer + sprintf(buffer, "Nvcsw:\t%lu\n"
> + "Nivcsw:\t%lu\n",
> + p->nvcsw,
> + p->nivcsw);
We don't encrypt variable names like this.
Pavel
Eric Dumazet wrote:
[snip]
What I meant is : You falsely speak of 'PROCESS performance statistics'.
Your implementation only cares about threads, not processes.
There is a slight difference, that getrusage() can do.
So if you do "cat /proc/PID/status", you'll get counters not for the
PROCESS,
Maxim Uvarov a écrit :
Eric Dumazet wrote:
>Please check kernel/sys.c:k_getrusage() to see how getrusage() has to
sum *lot* of individual fields to get precise process numbers (even
counting stats for dead threads)
Thanks for helping me and for this link. But it is not enough clear for
m
Bill Davidsen wrote:
[snip]
Your description is not very clear about the semantic of your stats.
You currently returns stats only for thread(s) (not process as you
claimed)
I'm not sure if you were confused by his use of thread in parenthesis,
but isn't the whole point of this to see
Eric Dumazet wrote:
>Please check kernel/sys.c:k_getrusage() to see how getrusage() has to
sum *lot* of individual fields to get precise process numbers (even
counting stats for dead threads)
Thanks for helping me and for this link. But it is not enough clear for
me what do you mean at thi
Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:59:16 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Patch adds Process Performance Statistics.
It make available to the user the following
new per-process (thread) performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches
* Voluntary Context Sw
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:59:16 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Patch adds Process Performance Statistics.
> It make available to the user the following
> new per-process (thread) performance statistics:
>* Involuntary Context Switches
>* Voluntary Context Switches
>* Num
Eric Dumazet wrote:
sysc_cnt being an 'unsigned long', its a 64 bits long integer...
So you probably need ld/std instructions instead of lwz/stw
Seems you are right again :(
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:59:16 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Eric, I's really better. I have done changes. Do you have any
> others objections now?
> All is in attached perf_stat.patch.
Hi Maxim
I know *nothing* about powerpc assembly, but I think there is a problem :
In
Eric Dumazet wrote:
[snip]
Please reorganize the code so that you dont duplicate
GET_THREAD_INFO() stuff
Thanks Eric, I's really better. I have done changes. Do you have any
others objections now?
All is in attached perf_stat.patch.
Best regards,
Maxim Uvarov.
Patch adds Process Performanc
Hi!
> Yes I have tested it on PPC, X86, X86_64, Mips targets.
> It works.
> >>+ cap_t(p->nvcsw),
> >>+ cap_t(p->nivcsw),
Nvcsw? W dn't s ncrptd dntfrs lk nvcsw n krnl. (:-)
Pavel
--
(english) ht
On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 18:22:22 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- linux-2.6.21-rc5.orig/arch/x86_64/kernel/entry.S
> +++ linux-2.6.21-rc5/arch/x86_64/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -236,6 +236,11 @@ ENTRY(system_call)
> movq %r10,%rcx
> call *sys_call_table(,%rax,8) # XXX:ri
Hello collogues,
Patches make available to the user the following new per-process
(thread) performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches
* Voluntary Context Switches
* Number of system calls
This data is useful for detecting hyperactivity patterns between processes.
I have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) It arrived here with some line-wrapping damage, most likely to the fact
that you posted it with Thunderbird. There's a mystic Thunderbird incantation
to make it not do that, but I have no idea what it is - it's in the list
archives someplace.
I don't use TBird (sea
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:50:50 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Other random comments:
>
> 1) You probably want to rebase against something more recent
> (2.6.21-rc
> or the final .21 when it's released).
>
> 2) It arrived here with some line-wrapping damage, most likely to the fact
> that you po
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:46:24 +0200, Eric Dumazet said:
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:15:43 +0400
> Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_THREAD_PERF_STAT_SYSC
> > + call inc_syscallcnt # Increment syscalls counter
> > current->sysc_cnt
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_THREA
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:15:43 +0400, Maxim Uvarov said:
> New version of this patch. Please flay it.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Max Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Index: linux-2.6.18/fs/proc/array.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6.18.orig/fs/proc/arr
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 20:52:34 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Index: linux-2.6.18/include/asm/thread_info.h
> ===
> --- linux-2.6.18.orig/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ linux-2.6.18/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -44,
Hello Eric,
I changed patch according to your comments.
Could you please take a look at it?
Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:15:43 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- linux-2.6.18.orig/arch/i386/kernel/entry.S
+++ linux-2.6.18/arch/i386/kernel/entry.S
@@ -394,6 +39
On 04/04/07, Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello again,
[snip]
New version of this patch. Please flay it.
A few small comments below.
+config THREAD_PERF_STAT
+ bool "Per-process (thread) performance statistics"
+ depends on (X86 || PPC || MIPS)
+ help
+
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:15:43 +0400
Maxim Uvarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- linux-2.6.18.orig/arch/i386/kernel/entry.S
> +++ linux-2.6.18/arch/i386/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -394,6 +394,9 @@ syscall_exit:
> cli # make sure we don't miss an
> interrupt
>
Hello again,
Please see my answers bellow:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:54:43 +0400, Maxim Uvarov said:
What do you think about it? Patch is bellow.
Was this patch actually compile and run tested?
Yes I have tested it on PPC, X86, X86_64, Mips targets.
It wor
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:54:43 +0400, Maxim Uvarov said:
> What do you think about it? Patch is bellow.
Was this patch actually compile and run tested?
> Index: linux-2.6.18/fs/proc/array.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6.18.orig/fs/proc/array.
Hello all,
I have idea to include to the user the following new per-process
(thread) performance statistics:
* Involuntary Context Switches
* Voluntary Context Switches
* Number of system calls
What do you think about it? Patch is bellow.
Best regards,
Max Uvarov.
Description:
47 matches
Mail list logo
