public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cputime: Consolidate cputime adjustment code
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:09:09 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121125190909.GA1866@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1353680484-7302-4-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>

[[PATCH 3/3] cputime: Consolidate cputime adjustment code] On 23/11/2012 (Fri 15:21) Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> task_cputime_adjusted() and thread_group_cputime_adjusted()
> essentially share the same code. They just don't use the same
> source:
> 
> * The first function uses the cputime in the task struct and the
> previous adjusted snapshot that ensures monotonicity.
> 
> * The second adds the cputime of all tasks in the group and the
> previous adjusted snapshot of the whole group from the signal
> structure.
> 
> Just consolidate the common code that does the adjustment. These
> functions just need to fetch the values from the appropriate
> source.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h  |    9 +++++++--
>  kernel/fork.c          |    2 +-
>  kernel/sched/cputime.c |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>  3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index e75cab5..d23204f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -433,6 +433,11 @@ struct cpu_itimer {
>  	u32 incr_error;
>  };
>  
> +struct cputime {
> +	cputime_t utime;
> +	cputime_t stime;
> +};
> +

Hi Frederic,

This new struct cputime is a 2/3 subset of the three variable struct
task_cputime we see right below.  Maybe this is a stupid question, but I
was wondering why you didn't re-use task_cputime, and ignore the
sum_exec_runtime field -- vs. introducing this very similar struct?

Or maybe there is another way to consolidate the structs?  With the
two being so similar, I wonder if it will be confusing when to use which
one of the two.

Thanks,
Paul.
--

/**
 * struct task_cputime - collected CPU time counts
 * @utime:		time spent in user mode, in &cputime_t units
 * @stime:              time spent in kernel mode, in &cputime_t units
 * @sum_exec_runtime:   total time spent on the CPU, in nanoseconds
 *
 * This structure groups together three kinds of CPU time that are
 * tracked for threads and thread groups.  Most things considering
 * CPU time want to group these counts together and treat all three
 * of them in parallel.
 */
struct task_cputime {
        cputime_t utime;
        cputime_t stime;
        unsigned long long sum_exec_runtime;
};


  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-25 19:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-23 14:21 [PATCH 0/3] cputime: Cleanups on adjusted cputime code Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-23 14:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] cputime: Move thread_group_cputime() to sched code Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-23 14:21 ` [PATCH 2/3] cputime: Rename thread_group_times to thread_group_cputime_adjusted Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-26 18:56   ` Steven Rostedt
2012-11-26 19:24     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-26 19:33       ` Steven Rostedt
2012-11-27 23:51         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-28  0:51           ` Steven Rostedt
2012-11-23 14:21 ` [PATCH 3/3] cputime: Consolidate cputime adjustment code Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-25 19:09   ` Paul Gortmaker [this message]
2012-11-26  0:16     ` Frederic Weisbecker

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=20121125190909.GA1866@windriver.com \
    --to=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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