<skip>
I've unfortunately no significant Unix culture.
I'm certainly young enough to be excused and by luck Linux shows me the road to the
hacker heaven.
So now I move forward the good direction, trying to understand the POSIX stuff ....
</skip>
From me, a POV without technical reasons is not a philosical one but more certainly an
historical one.
Process that will be runnable are not participating to the load so why incrementing
the load average.
Moreover if a process should be in state D only for a short time, the influence of the
incrementation should be near null for an AVERAGE value.
So why doing that (I mean load++) if there's an influence only when a process stay in
a D state for a long time (= when the only effect is to distort the load measure) ?
What's the technical reason behind this load_avrg++ ???
Christophe
On mer, 04 avr 2001 16:20:04 Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, christophe barbe wrote:
>
> > The sleep should certainly be interruptible and I that's what I
> > said to the GFS guy. But what the reason to increment the load
> > average for each D process ?
>
> from a philosical POV: they are processes that will be runnable as
> soon as the kernel returns to them.
>
> no idea if there are technical reasons for it.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christophe
>
> --paulj
>
--
Christophe Barbé
Software Engineer
Lineo High Availability Group
42-46, rue Médéric
92110 Clichy - France
phone (33).1.41.40.02.12
fax (33).1.41.40.02.01
www.lineo.com
-
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/
