Re: [patch] fix the softlockup watchdog to actually work

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Well, my observation is that both softlockup and the scheduler really 
>> want to measure unstolen time, so it seemed to me that sched_clock was 
>> a nice common place to implement that, rather than implementing a 
>> whole new time interface.  At the time that seemed OK, and nobody had 
>> any objections.
>>     
>
> yeah. But then it should not be using sched_clock() but CFS's new 
> rq_clock() method - which does try to construct a globally valid 
> timesource out of sched_clock(). [that fix is not backportable though]
>   

Hm, that doesn't look quite right.  Doesn't rq_clock measure time spent
running?  Unstolen time includes idle time too (it just excludes time in
which a VCPU is runnable but not actually running).

    J
-
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/