Am Montag, 20. August 2007 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
> could you send that precise sched_clock() patch? It should be an order
> of magnitude simpler than the high-precision stime/utime tracking you
> already do, and it's needed for quality scheduling anyway.
I have a question about that. I just played with sched_clock, and even when I
intentionally slow down sched_clock by a factor of 2, my cpu bound process
gets 100 % in top. If this is intentional, I dont understand how a
virtualized sched_clock would fix the accounting change?
Thanks
Christian
-
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/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
