On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 07:12:09PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > Or may be Peter could tell us as well. Peter, do you have a preference?
Still trying to wrap my head around it, but conceptually get_cpu_iowait_time_us() doesn't make any kind of sense. iowait isn't per cpu since effectively tasks that aren't running aren't assigned a cpu (as Oleg already pointed out). The fact that cpufreq 'needs' this just means that cpufreq is broken -- but I think I've said as much previously; cpufreq needs to stop living in the partitioned-mp era and get dragged (kicking and screaming) into the smp era. I'm also not entirely clear on the 'desired' semantics here. Do we count iowait time as idle or not? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
