Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates

Am Dienstag, 21. August 2007 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
> the 'invariant' i mentioned only covers scheduler behavior, not 
> accounting behavior. Accounting is separate in theory, but coupled in 
> practice now via sum_exec_runtime.

Forgot to answer about that: That means that the current design does not cover 
our requirement of showing process real time, even if we implement 
sched_clock? In that case I would suggest to merge my patch as a quick but 
correct solution and do it properly for 2.6.24. Of course better solutions 
are welcome :-)

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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [git pull request] scheduler updates
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
    • From: Martin Schwidefsky <[email protected]>
  • Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86_64 EFI runtime service support
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
• Previous by thread: Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
• Next by thread: Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]