From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 12:55:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 12:55:48 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.224.33.161]:38557 "EHLO holomorphy") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 14 May 2002 12:55:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:54:14 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Rik van Riel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] iowait statistics Message-ID: <20020514165414.GC27957@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20020514153956.GI15756@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 14 May 2002, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> This appears to be global across all cpu's. Maybe nr_iowait_tasks >> should be accounted on a per-cpu basis, where On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 01:36:00PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > While your proposal should work, somehow I doubt it's worth > the complexity. It's just a statistic to help sysadmins ;) I reserved judgment on that in order to present a possible mechanism. I'm not sure it is either; we'll know it matters if sysadmins scream. Cheers, Bill