From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965539AbXC1Lh4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:37:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965543AbXC1Lh4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:37:56 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:33647 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965539AbXC1Lhz (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:37:55 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 13:37:43 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: malc Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] sched: accurate user accounting Message-ID: <20070328113743.GA5615@elte.hu> References: <200703251159.03616.kernel@kolivas.org> <200703260901.54943.kernel@kolivas.org> <200703260957.34798.kernel@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.1.7 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * malc wrote: > This situation is harder to write a hog-like testcase for. Anyhow it > seems the difference in percentage stems from the `intr' field of > `/proc/stat', which fits. And following patch (which should be applied > on top of yours) seems to help. I wouldn't really know what to do with > softirq and the rest of counts touched by this function, so i left > them alone. > > Comments? i like it. FYI, i've applied your patch to -rt. Ingo