On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:54:37PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 04:34:16PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Makes sense?
> > >
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 04:34:16PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Makes sense?
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 18:25 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > >
> > > Makes sense?
> > >
> > > Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to hard
> > > capping is (probably easier inside the scheduler, where run_de
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:15:09PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> >
> > Makes sense?
> >
> > Not sure what the concrete way to report stolen time relative to hard
> > capping is (probably easier inside the scheduler, where run_delay is
> > calculated).
> >
> > Reporting the hard capping to the gue
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 23:30 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > > Sorry for the delay in the response. I
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 23:30 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > > Sorry for the delay in the response. I
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 14:11 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:52:16PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > I looked at doing that once but was told that I was changing the
> > > interface in an unacceptable way
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:52:16PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > I looked at doing that once but was told that I was changing the
> > interface in an unacceptable way, because now I was not reporting all of
> > the elapsed time. I
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:27:13AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > > Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> > > right away.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2013
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:29:12AM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 12:13 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > >> Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see t
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 14:34 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/3/5 Michael Wolf :
> > Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> > right away.
> >
> > On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbec
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 12:13 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> >> Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> >> right away.
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300,
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 22:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> > Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> > right away.
> >
> > On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 a
2013/3/5 Michael Wolf :
> Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> right away.
>
> On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> > 2013/2/5 Michael Wolf :
>> > > In the case of where you ha
2013/2/19 Marcelo Tosatti :
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> 2013/2/5 Michael Wolf :
>> > In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
>> > capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
>> > being reported in accounting tools
On 03/06/2013 05:41 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
>> Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
>> right away.
>>
>> On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:22:08PM -0600, Michael Wolf wrote:
> Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
> right away.
>
> On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > 2013/2/5 Michael
Sorry for the delay in the response. I did not see the email
right away.
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 22:11 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 2013/2/5 Michael Wolf :
> > > In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
>
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/2/5 Michael Wolf :
> > In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
> > capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
> > being reported in accounting tools such as top or vmstat. This can
2013/2/5 Michael Wolf :
> In the case of where you have a system that is running in a
> capped or overcommitted environment the user may see steal time
> being reported in accounting tools such as top or vmstat. This can
> cause confusion for the end user.
Sorry, I'm no expert in this area. But I
20 matches
Mail list logo
