Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750813AbWHYM6V (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:58:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750818AbWHYM6V (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:58:21 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.tip.net.au ([203.10.76.45]:52171 "EHLO ozlabs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750813AbWHYM6U (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:58:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17646.62439.526277.862006@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:58:15 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com Cc: Helge Hafting , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] dubious process system time. In-Reply-To: <1156501768.1640.19.camel@localhost> References: <20060824121825.GA4425@skybase> <1156426103.28464.29.camel@localhost> <200608241718.29406.ak@suse.de> <1156435363.28464.33.camel@localhost> <44EECCF9.7080902@aitel.hist.no> <1156501768.1640.19.camel@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 670 Lines: 17 Martin Schwidefsky writes: > The main question still is if it is correct to add softirq/hardirq time > to the system time of a process. If the answer turns out to be yes, then > it might be a clever idea to account softirq time to the softirqd. That > still leaves the question what to do with hardirq time .. > My take still is that softirq/hardirq time does not belong to the system > time of any process. I agree. Paul. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/