Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2007 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
> i've got a patch from Peter queued up. (see below) This should fix the
> main issue.
[...]
> --- linux.orig/fs/proc/array.c
> +++ linux/fs/proc/array.c
> @@ -358,7 +358,8 @@ static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_
> }
> utime = (clock_t)temp;
>
> - return clock_t_to_cputime(utime);
> + p->prev_utime = max(p->prev_utime, clock_t_to_cputime(utime));
> + return p->prev_utime;
> }
[...]
I dont think it will work. It will make utime monotic, but stime can still
decrease. For example let sum_exec_runtime increase by a tiny little bit while
utime will get a full additional tick. stime is sum-utime. So stime can still
go backwards. So I think that we need this kind of logic for stime as well,
no?
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]
