Re: [PATCH v3] sched/cputime: add steal time support to full dynticks CPU time accounting

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 25/05/2016 04:16, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> Ping Paolo or Peterz.

No need to ping, since Rik reviewed it 7 hours ago so the thread has
gotten a bump in our mailboxes.

And anyway this is the merge window, which is the most annoying time to
get pings and one-patch changes.  I don't mind at all getting large
series during the merge window, but the small ones definitely can wait a
week or two.

Thanks,

Paolo

> 2016-05-25 3:22 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 20:27 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> This patch adds steal guest time support to full dynticks CPU
>>> time accounting. After 'commit ff9a9b4c4334 ("sched, time: Switch
>>> VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN to jiffy granularity")', time is jiffy
>>> based sampling even if it's still listened to ring boundaries, so
>>> steal_account_process_tick() is reused to account how much 'ticks'
>>> are steal time after the last accumulation.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Radim <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> This also nicely fixes up f9c904b7613b ("sched/cputime:
>> Fix steal_account_process_tick() to always return jiffies"),
>> which relies on a bool function returning a certain number
>> of jiffies :)
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> --
>> All rights reversed
> 
> 
>