Re: [Patch 0/8] per-task delay accounting

[Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com>]

Peter Chubb wrote:

> > > > > > "Shailabh" == Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com> writes:
> > > > > >            
>
>  
>
> Shailabh> To this list we can also add
>
> Shailabh>     Microstate accounting Peter Chubb
> Shailabh> <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au> I don't know if Peter is still
> Shailabh> interested in pursuing this or it was rejected.
>
> It's still maintained in a sporadic sort of way --- I update it when
> either I need it for something, or someone's downloaded it and asks
> why it doesn't work agains kernel X.Y.Z.  I see a few downloads a
> month.
>  
So do you intend to pursue acceptance ? If so, do you think the 
netlink-based taskstats
interface provided by the delay accounting patches could be an 
acceptable substitute for the
interfaces you had (from  an old lkml post, they appear  to be  
/proc/tgid/msa and  a syscall
based one) ?


> My microstate accounting patch overlaps the delay accounting patch quite a
> lot in functionality, (but I thnk mine is cleaner except for interrupt
> time accounting... which the delay accounting patch doesn't do.  I
> wanted to know how much time a thread *really* had on the processor,
> subtracting off the time spent in interrupt handlers for some other
> process).
>  
Thanks. Will incorporate into a note on the mechanisms of the other 
accounting patches.

--Shailabh


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/