On Nov 12, 2007 11:29 PM, Balbir Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think it's a good hack, but not sure about the complexity to implement
> the code. I worry that if the number of tasks increase (say run into
> thousands for one or more groups and a few groups have just a few
> tasks), we'll lose out on accuracy.
But for the case we're looking at, you've already said that you don't
care much about actually controlling CPU, just monitoring it. So what
does it matter if the CPU sharing isn't perfectly accurate? I don't
think that you're painting a realistic scenario.
>
> I think we already have the code, we need to make it more useful and
> reusable.
In that case we should take the existing cpu_acct code out of 2.6.24
until the API has been made more useful and reusable, so that we don't
have to support it for ever.
Paul
-
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]
