On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 16:01 +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > There is one change in patch #2 that might require a change on powerpc > > and/or ia64. The generic TICK_ONESHOT/NO_HZ code calculates the number > > of ticks spent with a disabled HZ timer and accounts this as idle time. > > For a configuration for VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y this is horribly wrong. > > Either you have precise accounting or you don't. Patch #2 just removes > > the calculation for VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y. The architectures which support > > precise accounting have to deal with it on their own. This is where the > > powerpc and ia64 maintainer come into play. Would you look at patch #2 > > please ? > > > > To make it clearer what happens in tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick I've added > > a new function account_idle_ticks(). And for good measure another one named > > account_steal_ticks() for xen where "interesting" things have been done > > with the account_steal_time interface. > > Any news about powerpc? Do these patches break anything or does it work? I didn't have a chance to look at it yet. I'll try to get that looked at today. Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
