Li, Aubrey wrote: > Clock system/subsystem is special. They are expected to occur every > 100 times per second. I think they can't be maken less often. > The current report is really confused. Because the sum of the causes for > wakups is far away from the number of "Wakeups-from-idle per second". > My suggestion is, remove clock/cbe_hres_tick/cyclic_timer report at all, > or just keep clock event. > That is just my thougts, ;-) > I understand, and agree this could be confusing. The counts of "software waking up" and the counts of the "cpu wakeups" are really looking at two different things, although one could reasonably assume that they are looking at the same thing (i.e. 1 software wakeup == 1 CPU wakeup), and be confused when the counts don't indicate this. Perhaps we should just be more explicit (either in the command or the documentation) of what's being observed? I'm worried that if we change the probes we look at to achieve this consistency (saying that "av_dispatch_softvect" happened 100 times, rather than clock, cbe_hres_tick(), and cyclic_timer() are 100/sec cyclics, then it will be harder to track down inefficient cyclic subsystem consumers....
-Eric
