linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: "Johan van Baarlen" <vanbaajf@xs4all.nl>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Michael Abbott" <michael@araneidae.co.uk>,
	"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@medozas.de>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Johan van Baarlen" <jf@vanbaarlen.demon.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: /proc/uptime idle counter remains at 0
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:37:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090910173700.5e5fc3f8@skybase> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2f08a48107b19501ffa2c1570483544f.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>

On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:02:53 +0200
"Johan van Baarlen" <vanbaajf@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> with this patch the idle-time in /proc/uptime makes a lot more sense - but
> it runs about a factor of 4 too fast (I'm thinking this is not coincidence
> - I've got 4 cpu's in this box, and simply adding 4 idle timers means you
> are going 4 times too fast).
> 
> Can we just add idletime /= (i+1) after the foreachcpu loop, or am I
> thinking too easy?

With "/= (i+1)" you mean dividing the result by the number of cpus, no?
That doesn't work because of that fact that the value used to contain
the accumulated idle time of a uni-processor system and cpu hotplug.
The only way to get meaningful numbers is to make the value contain the
sum of the idle over all possible cpus. The user space tool that reads
the value needs to take the number of currently active cpus into
account.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


  reply	other threads:[~2009-09-10 15:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-09  8:05 /proc/uptime idle counter remains at 0 Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-10 17:12 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11  0:46   ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-11  6:23     ` [PATCH] " Michael Abbott
2009-05-11  7:35       ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11  7:42         ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-05-11  8:10           ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-11  9:07       ` Michael Abbott
2009-05-11  7:23     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-08-14 12:18 ` [PATCH] " Michael Abbott
2009-08-17  5:25   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17  6:12     ` Michael Abbott
2009-08-17  6:23       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17  6:58         ` Michael Abbott
2009-08-17  8:23           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-09-09  5:58   ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-09  8:02     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-09-10 13:02     ` Johan van Baarlen
2009-09-10 15:37       ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2009-09-10 16:27         ` Michael Abbott
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-05-18 13:23 Michael Abbott
2009-05-18 14:00 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-05-25 10:28 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2009-07-06 15:48   ` Michael Abbott
2009-07-06 15:56     ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-07-06 16:09       ` Michael Abbott

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=20090910173700.5e5fc3f8@skybase \
    --to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
    --cc=jf@vanbaarlen.demon.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael@araneidae.co.uk \
    --cc=vanbaajf@xs4all.nl \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).