Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2007 schrieb Ingo Molnar: > i've got a patch from Peter queued up. (see below) This should fix the > main issue. [...] > --- linux.orig/fs/proc/array.c > +++ linux/fs/proc/array.c > @@ -358,7 +358,8 @@ static cputime_t task_utime(struct task_ > } > utime = (clock_t)temp; > > - return clock_t_to_cputime(utime); > + p->prev_utime = max(p->prev_utime, clock_t_to_cputime(utime)); > + return p->prev_utime; > } [...]
I dont think it will work. It will make utime monotic, but stime can still decrease. For example let sum_exec_runtime increase by a tiny little bit while utime will get a full additional tick. stime is sum-utime. So stime can still go backwards. So I think that we need this kind of logic for stime as well, no? Christian - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
