From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@redhat.com>,
Tomas Smetana <tsmetana@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] de_thread() should update ->real_start_time
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:06:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130611200600.GA15168@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51B7690C.8090805@linaro.org>
On 06/11, John Stultz wrote:
>
> On 06/11/2013 10:13 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
>> But perhaps this is fine and even more correct?
>
> So I think it probably *makes more sense* to include suspend_time in the
> elapsed runtime value being exported via bacct_add_tsk() and
> do_acct_process(), but I unfortunately worry now any such change would
> risk breaking userland expectations.
>
> The *actual* risk may be quite minor, so this could be one of those:
> "Let the tree fall and if no one is there to hear it, fine" interface
> breaks, but I'm not sure I'm eager enough to be the one proposing it. :)
Yes, same thoughts here ;)
Still it is ugly imho to keep task->start_time just for taskstats,
and _I think_ nobody really cares. Perhaps I'll try to send the patch
later...
And look. It seems that ->ac_btime (Process Creation Time) in
bacct_add_tsk() is obviously wrong anyway? So perhaps we can fix
this and in this case we can also change the meaning of start_time.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-11 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-10 18:33 [PATCH 0/3] de_thread() should update ->real_start_time Oleg Nesterov
2013-06-10 18:33 ` [PATCH 1/3] de_thread: mt-exec " Oleg Nesterov
2013-06-10 18:33 ` [PATCH 2/3] uptime_proc_show: use get_monotonic_boottime() Oleg Nesterov
2013-06-10 18:33 ` [PATCH 3/3] do_sysinfo: " Oleg Nesterov
2013-06-10 19:48 ` [PATCH 0/3] de_thread() should update ->real_start_time John Stultz
2013-06-11 17:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-06-11 18:14 ` John Stultz
2013-06-11 20:06 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2013-06-10 20:18 ` John Stultz
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=20130611200600.GA15168@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tjanouse@redhat.com \
--cc=tsmetana@redhat.com \
/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.