Re: some questions about times

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dear all:
2010/12/10 loody <miloody@xxxxxxxxx>:
> hi:
>
> 2010/12/10 pradeep singh <pradeep.rautela@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2010 6:39 AM, "loody" <miloody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> hi Muyadi:
>>> 2010/12/10 Mulyadi Santosa <mulyadi.santosa@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> > Hi...
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 21:56, loody <miloody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> Deal all:
>>> >> I have some questions about times in #include <sys/times.h>.
>>> >> As far as I know, times will "get process and waited-for child process
>>> >> times".
>>> >> so if the child is not finish or dead, this function will cause the
>>> >> deadlock, right?
>>> >
>>> > From "man 2 times"
>>> > " In Linux kernel versions before 2.6.9, if the disposition of SIGCHLD
>>> > is
>>> >       set  to SIG_IGN then the times of terminated children are
>>> > automatically
>>> >       included in the tms_cstime and tms_cutime fields, although
>>> > POSIX.1-2001
>>> >       says that this should only happen if the calling process wait()s
>>> > on its
>>> >       children.  This non-conformance is rectified in Linux 2.6.9 and
>>> >  later"
>>> >
>>> > So, indirectly, I think the time accumulation happens when the wait()
>>> > function returns...which is...I guess polling or regularly checking
>>> > (select() maybe?) the signal from child.
>>> >
>>> thanks for ur help.
>>> But I man nothing about times.
>>>
>>> $ man 2 times
>>> No manual entry for times in section 2
>>> $
>>>
>>> Should I update any packages?
>>
>> Yes you should try installing dev , posix and posix-dev manpages.
> should I use any one of below apt-get packages?
> sudo apt-get install dev
> sudo apt-get install posix
> sudo apt-get install posix-dev
> appreciate your help,
> miloody

after tracing the kernel source code, I found "times" seems a system
call and it will call thread_group_cputime for collectiing all the
time duration of its threads.
It should return fast, since it just repeatedly call next_thread and
add the utime and stime.
if my observation is correct, this function will not consume much cpu
time, right?
appreciate your help,
miloody

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ




[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux