From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: "Luca Tettamanti" <kronos.it@gmail.com>,
"Frans Pop" <elendil@planet.nl>, "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>,
"Alexander E. Patrakov" <patrakov@ums.usu.ru>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 16:21:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47054B2E.1050906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200710042200.03489.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
On 10/04/2007 04:00 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 schrieb Chuck Ebbert:
>> Is CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING set?
>
> This is s390 and powerpc only, so the answer is probably no ;-)
>
The code in fs/proc/array.c is... interesting.
1. task_stime() converts p->se.sum_exec_runtime to a clock_t
2. it calls task_utime() which does the same thing (can it change
between the two reads?), does some calculations that yield a
clock_t, turns the result into a cputime and returns that
3. task_stime() then converts that result back into a clock_t and
uses it!
static cputime_t task_stime(struct task_struct *p)
{
clock_t stime;
stime = nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime) -
cputime_to_clock_t(task_utime(p));
return clock_t_to_cputime(stime);
}
static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_struct *p)
{
clock_t utime = cputime_to_clock_t(p->utime),
total = utime + cputime_to_clock_t(p->stime);
u64 temp;
temp = (u64)nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime);
if (total) {
temp *= utime;
do_div(temp, total);
}
utime = (clock_t)temp;
return clock_t_to_cputime(utime);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-04 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-03 12:33 top displaying 9999% CPU usage Frans Pop
2007-10-03 12:52 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-03 13:03 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
2007-10-03 14:04 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-03 14:43 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 14:51 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 19:27 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top (was: top displaying 9999% CPU usage) Frans Pop
2007-10-03 20:24 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-10-03 23:32 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-04 19:19 ` Luca Tettamanti
2007-10-04 19:32 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 20:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 20:21 ` Chuck Ebbert [this message]
2007-10-04 21:10 ` [PATCH for testing] " Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 22:01 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 22:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-05 11:43 ` Luca
2007-10-05 15:07 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-05 15:49 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-08 16:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-08 17:00 ` Ingo Molnar
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=47054B2E.1050906@redhat.com \
--to=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi \
--cc=kronos.it@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=patrakov@ums.usu.ru \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/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.