Juergen Keil wrote: > 3. did confuse me, too. But I think the loop isn't wrong, > it just wastes time. When the walk function is called > for cpu N, the data we read in the loop for cpu > index != N is 0.
Right, I realized data->dtada_percpu[i] is ZERO if cpu id != i. But I still suggest we fixed this in the specific cpu way. It seems we still need to figure out why the duration is negative here other than just ignoring the invalid value. Thanks, -Aubrey > > 2009/4/16 Rafael Vanoni <Rafael.Vanoni at sun.com>: >> Li, Aubrey wrote: >> I agree with these first two, I need a little more time to properly >> check 3 and 4. I'll get back to you as soon as possible. >> >> Thanks, >> Rafael >> >>> 3) I failed to understand why the current walk function need to go >>> through all CPU to get the dtrace time everytime to fill a per-cpu >>> array(g_cpu_power_states). That might be the reason why duration < >>> 0. So change to count the specific cpu only. >>> >>> 4) if we have the condition check (dt_state_time > >>> cpu_pow->time_accounted), we also >>> need to check the opposite case. time_accounted should be reset if >>> it's not used by this time. >>> >>> If the following patch makes sense, we'll have to fix the similar >>> cstate issue.
