Re: [PATCH] cpuacct: VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING don't prevent percpucputime count

[Bharata B Rao]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:31:14AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > > > BTW, did you observe any real problem with the percpu counter spinlock ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > No.
> > > > > I review percpu_counter() caller recently and it seems stragen usage.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I should have phrased the question better ...
> > > > 
> > > > So have you found any performance degradation with any benchmarks/workloads
> > > > on archs which define VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING due to percpu_counter spinlock
> > > > being taken on every tick ? If the answer is no, don't you think we could
> > > > wait before making the kind of change you are proposing ?
> > > 
> > > maybe, I don't understand your point.
> > 
> > My point is, let us not make this change if it is not a real problem that
> > has been observed on archs which define VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING.
> 
> It's nice joke. but not constructive.

I was only asking you if you have seen any real life problem with this
and you said no. In that context, if I re-read my above point, I think
I should have a pretty good sense of humour to consider it as joke :)

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