From: Manik Raina <manik@cisco.com>
To: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: adding counters to count bytes read/written
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:33:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CE8D80C.3A771CB1@cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0205201506240.14394-100000@localhost.localdomain> <20020520131222.K9955@mea-ext.zmailer.org>
Thanks for the comments Matti, Please see inline ...
Matti Aarnio wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 03:09:36PM +0530, Manik Raina wrote:
> > Hi Linus,
> >
> > This patch adds 2 counters to the task_struct for
> > counting how many bytes were read/written using
> > the read()/write() system calls.
> >
> > These counters may be useful in determining how
> > many IO requests are made by each process.
>
> These are defined as UINTegers, are you sure that is appropriate type ?
> What to do when they will overflow ? For short term activity tracking
> they may be ok (4GB/200 MB/sec = 20 sec to wrap around), but for accounting
> the overflow might not be liked thing..
How about 64 bit counters ? i feel those should go on without
wraparound for a _very_ long time.
Did you have anything else in mind ?
>
> For short-term IO-activity tracking they may indeed make sense, but I
> would add another pair of counters to assist on that tracking. Namely
> "values at the end of previous interval", which are maintained by the
> activity tracking code.
Would this still be required if the counters are 64 bit ?
>
> Reading one byte at the time won't grow those counters very fast, but will
> cause massive amounts of syscalls, and context switches, so tracking data
> amount alone isn't good enough.
What else would you suggest i track ?
thanks
Manik
>
> ....
> > diff -u -r ../temp/linux-2.5.12/include/linux/sched.h ./include/linux/sched.h
> > --- ../temp/linux-2.5.12/include/linux/sched.h Wed May 1 05:38:47 2002
> > +++ ./include/linux/sched.h Mon May 20 09:25:32 2002
> > @@ -315,6 +315,7 @@
> > int link_count, total_link_count;
> > struct tty_struct *tty; /* NULL if no tty */
> > unsigned int locks; /* How many file locks are being held */
> > + unsigned int bytes_written, bytes_read;
> > /* ipc stuff */
> > struct sysv_sem sysvsem;
> > /* CPU-specific state of this task */
>
> /Matti Aarnio
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-20 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-20 9:39 [PATCH]: adding counters to count bytes read/written Manik Raina
2002-05-20 10:12 ` Matti Aarnio
2002-05-20 11:03 ` Manik Raina [this message]
2002-05-20 18:32 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-05-20 18:51 ` Matti Aarnio
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=3CE8D80C.3A771CB1@cisco.com \
--to=manik@cisco.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matti.aarnio@zmailer.org \
/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