Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 14:46:52 +0200
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
btw., CFS does this change to fs/proc/array.c:
@@ -410,6 +408,14 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
/* convert nsec -> ticks */
start_time = nsec_to_clock_t(start_time);
+ /*
+ * Use CFS's precise accounting, if available:
+ */
+ if (!has_rt_policy(task)) {
+ utime = nsec_to_clock_t(task->sum_exec_runtime);
+ stime = 0;
+ }
+
res = sprintf(buffer,"%d (%s) %c %d %d %d %d %d %lu %lu \
%lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %ld %ld %ld %ld %d 0 %llu %lu %ld %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu \
%lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %d %d %lu %lu %llu\n",
if you have some spare capacity to improve this code, it could be
further enhanced by not setting 'stime' to zero, but using the
existing jiffies based utime/stime statistics as a _ratio_ to split up
the precise p->sum_exec_runtime. That way we dont have to add precise
accounting to syscall entry/exit points (that would be quite
expensive), but still the sum of utime+stime would be very precise.
(and that's what matters most anyway)
i found an accounting bug in this: it didnt sum up threads correctly.
The patch below fixes this. The stime == 0 problem is still there
though.
Ingo
Index: linux/fs/proc/array.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/fs/proc/array.c
+++ linux/fs/proc/array.c
@@ -310,6 +310,29 @@ int proc_pid_status(struct task_struct *
return buffer - orig;
}
+static clock_t task_utime(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ /*
+ * Use CFS's precise accounting, if available:
+ */
+ if (!has_rt_policy(p) && !(sysctl_sched_load_smoothing & 128))
+ return nsec_to_clock_t(p->sum_exec_runtime);
+
+ return cputime_to_clock_t(p->utime);
+}
+
+static clock_t task_stime(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ /*
+ * Use CFS's precise accounting, if available:
+ */
+ if (!has_rt_policy(p) && !(sysctl_sched_load_smoothing & 128))
+ return 0;
+
+ return cputime_to_clock_t(p->stime);
+}
+
+
static int do_task_stat(struct task_struct *task, char * buffer, int whole)
{
unsigned long vsize, eip, esp, wchan = ~0UL;
@@ -324,7 +347,8 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
unsigned long long start_time;
unsigned long cmin_flt = 0, cmaj_flt = 0;
unsigned long min_flt = 0, maj_flt = 0;
- cputime_t cutime, cstime, utime, stime;
+ cputime_t cutime, cstime;
+ clock_t utime, stime;
unsigned long rsslim = 0;
char tcomm[sizeof(task->comm)];
unsigned long flags;
@@ -342,7 +366,8 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
sigemptyset(&sigign);
sigemptyset(&sigcatch);
- cutime = cstime = utime = stime = cputime_zero;
+ cutime = cstime = cputime_zero;
+ utime = stime = 0;
rcu_read_lock();
if (lock_task_sighand(task, &flags)) {
@@ -368,15 +393,15 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
do {
min_flt += t->min_flt;
maj_flt += t->maj_flt;
- utime = cputime_add(utime, t->utime);
- stime = cputime_add(stime, t->stime);
+ utime += task_utime(t);
+ stime += task_stime(t);
t = next_thread(t);
} while (t != task);
min_flt += sig->min_flt;
maj_flt += sig->maj_flt;
- utime = cputime_add(utime, sig->utime);
- stime = cputime_add(stime, sig->stime);
+ utime += cputime_to_clock_t(sig->utime);
+ stime += cputime_to_clock_t(sig->stime);
}
sid = signal_session(sig);
@@ -392,8 +417,8 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
if (!whole) {
min_flt = task->min_flt;
maj_flt = task->maj_flt;
- utime = task->utime;
- stime = task->stime;
+ utime = task_utime(task);
+ stime = task_stime(task);
}
/* scale priority and nice values from timeslices to -20..20 */
@@ -408,14 +433,6 @@ static int do_task_stat(struct task_stru
/* convert nsec -> ticks */
start_time = nsec_to_clock_t(start_time);
- /*
- * Use CFS's precise accounting, if available:
- */
- if (!has_rt_policy(task)) {
- utime = nsec_to_clock_t(task->sum_exec_runtime);
- stime = 0;
- }
-
res = sprintf(buffer,"%d (%s) %c %d %d %d %d %d %lu %lu \
%lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %ld %ld %ld %ld %d 0 %llu %lu %ld %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu \
%lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %lu %d %d %lu %lu %llu\n",
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Balbir Singh
- Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Balbir Singh
- Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- References:
- [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Ingo Molnar
- Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Balbir Singh
- Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- From: Ingo Molnar
- [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] libata: always use polling SETXFER
- Next by Date: [PATCH 1/2] use list_for_each() for iteration in Host AP driver
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v14
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
