On 2019/11/29 上午9:52, 王贇 wrote: [snip] >> That would avoid the partitioning question completely, exposed values >> would be simple numbers and provided information should be equal. A >> drawback is that such a sampling would be slower (but sufficient for the >> illustrating example). > > You mean the cgroup numa stat just give the accumulated local/remote access? > > As long as the counter won't overflow, maybe... sounds easier to explain too. > > So user tracing locality will then get just one percentage (calculated on > their own) from a cgroup, but one should be enough to represent the situation. > > Sounds like a good idea to me :-) will try to do that in next version. I did some research regarding cpuacct, and find cpuacct_charge() is a good place to do hierarchical update, however, what we get there is the execution time delta since last update_curr(). I'm afraid we can't just do local/remote accumulation since the sample period now is changing, still have to accumulate the execution time into locality regions. While at least we should be able to address your concern regarding exectime collection :-) Regards, Michael Wang > > Regards, > Michael Wang > >> >> Michal >>
