Re: per-thread rusage

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 18:12:57 -0700
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 17:42:01 -0700 William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:
> >>  My use for it is report generation in VM (and possibly other)
> >> testcases.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 05:53:52PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > OK.  The cool kids are using taskstats for this sort of thing now, but I
> > note that taskstats is inexplicably missing the context-switch accounting,
> > and perhaps other things?
> 
> Sounds interesting. I'll poke around there for testcase affairs if I
> get moving on them first. I've no sentimental attachment to the rusage
> patch, so if taskstats do happen to displace this, I'm not concerned.
> (That said, it may still make sense to do this for the purposes of API
> compatibility. I'll keep it moving along until it's all decided.)
> 

rusage() is a bit easier to use, as it delivers synchronously at task exit.
 taskstats delivers over netlink into a separate process (and can be polled
at any time during task execution) but does require new skills, more
(Linux-specific) code and perhaps more complex synchronisation.