From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754790Ab1I1PP6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:15:58 -0400
Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:48879 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754748Ab1I1PP5 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:15:57 -0400
Message-ID: <4E8339EA.7070700@parallels.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:14:50 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
CC: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <paul@paulmenage.org>,
        <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, <daniel.lezcano@free.fr>,
        <jbottomley@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD 3/9] Display /proc/stat information per cgroup
References: <1316816432-9237-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com>  <1316816432-9237-4-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1317160096.21836.14.camel@twins>
In-Reply-To: <1317160096.21836.14.camel@twins>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [187.46.219.221]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 09/27/2011 06:48 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 19:20 -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> +static inline void task_cgroup_account_field(struct task_struct *p,
>> +                                            cputime64_t tmp, int index)
>> +{
>> +       struct kernel_stat *kstat;
>> +       struct task_group *tg = task_group(p);
>> +
>> +       do {
>> +               kstat = this_cpu_ptr(tg->cpustat);
>> +               kstat->cpustat[index] = cputime64_add(kstat->cpustat[index],
>> +                                                     tmp);
>
> So aside from the cputime64_t nonsense you could actually write that as:
>
> 		__this_cpu_add(tg->cpustat[index], tmp);
>
> which should yield better asm I think, a quick grep seems to confirm
> cputime64_t is indeed a u64 all over so its fair to just ignore that.

Ok, It would indeed be better.