From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: "Luca Tettamanti" <kronos.it@gmail.com>,
"Frans Pop" <elendil@planet.nl>, "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>,
"Alexander E. Patrakov" <patrakov@ums.usu.ru>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: Decreasing stime running confuses top
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 16:21:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47054B2E.1050906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200710042200.03489.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
On 10/04/2007 04:00 PM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 schrieb Chuck Ebbert:
>> Is CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING set?
>
> This is s390 and powerpc only, so the answer is probably no ;-)
>
The code in fs/proc/array.c is... interesting.
1. task_stime() converts p->se.sum_exec_runtime to a clock_t
2. it calls task_utime() which does the same thing (can it change
between the two reads?), does some calculations that yield a
clock_t, turns the result into a cputime and returns that
3. task_stime() then converts that result back into a clock_t and
uses it!
static cputime_t task_stime(struct task_struct *p)
{
clock_t stime;
stime = nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime) -
cputime_to_clock_t(task_utime(p));
return clock_t_to_cputime(stime);
}
static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_struct *p)
{
clock_t utime = cputime_to_clock_t(p->utime),
total = utime + cputime_to_clock_t(p->stime);
u64 temp;
temp = (u64)nsec_to_clock_t(p->se.sum_exec_runtime);
if (total) {
temp *= utime;
do_div(temp, total);
}
utime = (clock_t)temp;
return clock_t_to_cputime(utime);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-04 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-03 12:33 top displaying 9999% CPU usage Frans Pop
2007-10-03 12:52 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-03 13:03 ` Alexander E. Patrakov
2007-10-03 14:04 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-03 14:43 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 14:51 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-10-03 19:27 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top (was: top displaying 9999% CPU usage) Frans Pop
2007-10-03 20:24 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-10-03 23:32 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-04 19:19 ` Luca Tettamanti
2007-10-04 19:32 ` Decreasing stime running confuses top Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 20:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 20:21 ` Chuck Ebbert [this message]
2007-10-04 21:10 ` [PATCH for testing] " Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-04 22:01 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-10-04 22:31 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-05 11:43 ` Luca
2007-10-05 15:07 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-05 15:49 ` Frans Pop
2007-10-08 16:49 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-10-08 17:00 ` Ingo Molnar
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=47054B2E.1050906@redhat.com \
--to=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi \
--cc=kronos.it@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=patrakov@ums.usu.ru \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/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