[BUG ? in 2.5.68] time and sleep...

From: Paolo Ciarrocchi (ciarrocchi@linuxmail.org)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 14:57:48 EST

Next message: Nicolas Pitre: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Previous message: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: [BUG ? in 2.5.68] time and sleep..."
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: [BUG ? in 2.5.68] time and sleep..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi all,
I dunno if what I'm reporting is a real problem or not...
I was playing with both the time and sleep command,
I wrote a simple script like the following

for i in `seq 1 1 600`;
do
time sleep 1
done;

Then I've run it in background and then I've run 'dbench 32'.

As soon as dbench finis its work I've killed the process in background.

The script was redirected to a file,
this is the result of a simple cat file.txt|grep elapsed|cut -d " " -f 3

0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.16elapsed <-
0:02.84elapsed <-
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.48elapsed <-
0:04.86elapsed <-
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.01elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.01elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.01elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.03elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.01elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.55elapsed <-
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.06elapsed
0:01.02elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.04elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.19elapsed <-
0:01.00elapsed <-
0:02.46elapsed <-
0:01.27elapsed <-
0:01.03elapsed <-
0:01.07elapsed <-
0:08.20elapsed <-
0:02.88elapsed <-
0:09.24elapsed <-
0:01.00elapsed
0:05.11elapsed <-
0:07.08elapsed <-
0:10.69elapsed <-
0:03.06elapsed <-
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
0:01.00elapsed
[...]

So in a few cases sleep 1 seems to last for a few seconds.

Is it OK ?

Kernel is 2.5.68 preemption on.

Ciao,
Paolo

-- ______________________________________________ http://www.linuxmail.org/ Now with e-mail forwarding for only US$5.95/yr

Powered by Outblaze - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Nicolas Pitre: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Previous message: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk: "Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!]"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: [BUG ? in 2.5.68] time and sleep..."
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: [BUG ? in 2.5.68] time and sleep..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:36 EST