From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
michael@araneidae.co.uk
Subject: Re: /proc/uptime idle counter remains at 0
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:23:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090511092357.482ae8e9@skybase> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.0905110237310.17675@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
On Mon, 11 May 2009 02:46:03 +0200 (CEST)
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de> wrote:
>
> On Sunday 2009-05-10 19:12, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> >>
> >> So, were the updates to uptime.c missed, or do we now live on with
> >> /proc/uptime constantly having 0?
> >
> >The second paragraph from git commit 79741dd tells you more about this:
> >
> >In addition idle time is no more added to the stime of the idle
> >process. This field now contains the system time of the idle process as
> >it should be. On systems without VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING this will always
> >be zero as every tick that occurs while idle is running will be
> >accounted as idle time.
> >
> >The point is the semantics of the stime field for the idle process. The
> >stime field used to contain the real system time (cpu really did
> >something) of the idle process plus the idle time (cpu is stopped).
> >After the change the field only contains the real system time. Which is
> >ihmo much more useful, no?
>
> Actually doing something while idle would then probably be limited to
> CPUs that have no HLT instruction/state, like ancient i386, right?
>
> Are the semantics of /proc/uptime (more-or-less standardsly) defined
> somewhere, e.g. written down into a manual page?
Not really, the second field is the stime of the idle process for the
boot cpu. This is a mixture of the time spent in idle doing work and
waiting on hlt. In an smp system with multiple task_structs with stime
fields it makes even less sense. The field is ill defined.
> Nevertheless, one could argue that, hypothetically, some people or
> their scripts interpreted the second field as the time that there was
> no process running; sort of a minimalistic way to tell the average
> system use in % beyond the 1/5/15-loadavg counters. So the field could be
> kept, or now that 2nd place displays 0.00, be re-added. Depending on
> how “standardized” /proc/uptime's format is, the 0.00 could either
> stay as second position or move to third position.
>
> > cat /proc/uptime
> 496468.50 432205.41
> > bc -l <<<'100-(432205.41*100/496468.50)'
> 12.94 (%)
That would work on a uni-processor. On an smp with cpu hotplug you'll
get interesting results..
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-11 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-09 8:05 /proc/uptime idle counter remains at 0 Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-10 17:12 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11 0:46 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-11 6:23 ` [PATCH] " Michael Abbott
2009-05-11 7:35 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11 7:42 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-11 8:10 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11 9:07 ` Michael Abbott
2009-05-11 7:23 ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2009-08-14 12:18 ` Michael Abbott
2009-08-17 5:25 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17 6:12 ` Michael Abbott
2009-08-17 6:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17 6:58 ` Michael Abbott
2009-08-17 8:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-09-09 5:58 ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-09 8:02 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-09-10 13:02 ` Johan van Baarlen
2009-09-10 15:37 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-09-10 16:27 ` Michael Abbott
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090511092357.482ae8e9@skybase \
--to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael@araneidae.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.