Re: utime accounting regression since 4.6 (was: Re: [PACTH v2 0/3] Implement /proc//totmaps)

2016-09-30 Thread Rik van Riel
On Fri, 2016-09-30 at 11:49 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > [CC Mike and Mel as they have seen some accounting oddities >  when doing performance testing. They can share details but >  essentially the system time just gets too high] > > For your reference the email thread started > http://lkml.kernel

Re: utime accounting regression since 4.6 (was: Re: [PACTH v2 0/3] Implement /proc//totmaps)

2016-09-30 Thread Michal Hocko
[CC Mike and Mel as they have seen some accounting oddities when doing performance testing. They can share details but essentially the system time just gets too high] For your reference the email thread started http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160823143330.gl23...@dhcp22.suse.cz I suspect this is mai

Re: utime accounting regression since 4.6 (was: Re: [PACTH v2 0/3] Implement /proc//totmaps)

2016-08-23 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 16:33 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 23-08-16 10:26:03, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 22-08-16 19:47:09, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Mon 22-08-16 19:29:36, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Mon 22-08-16 18:45:54, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > I have no idea w

utime accounting regression since 4.6 (was: Re: [PACTH v2 0/3] Implement /proc//totmaps)

2016-08-23 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 23-08-16 10:26:03, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 22-08-16 19:47:09, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 22-08-16 19:29:36, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Mon 22-08-16 18:45:54, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > [...] > > > > I have no idea why those numbers are so different on my laptop > > > > yet. It sure