From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun  5 12:45:36 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95E9F16A421;
	Tue,  5 Jun 2007 12:45:36 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au)
Received: from mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au
	[211.29.132.183])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CDA13C44B;
	Tue,  5 Jun 2007 12:45:35 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au)
Received: from c220-239-235-248.carlnfd3.nsw.optusnet.com.au
	(c220-239-235-248.carlnfd3.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.239.235.248])
	by mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id
	l55CjOYZ023069
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 5 Jun 2007 22:45:25 +1000
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 22:45:26 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org
To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <46652D17.5090903@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20070605214404.X47001@delplex.bde.org>
References: <20070529105856.L661@10.0.0.1> <200705291456.38515.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<20070529121653.P661@10.0.0.1> <20070530065423.H93410@delplex.bde.org>
	<20070529141342.D661@10.0.0.1> <20070530125553.G12128@besplex.bde.org>
	<20070529201255.X661@10.0.0.1> <20070529220936.W661@10.0.0.1>
	<20070530201618.T13220@besplex.bde.org> <20070530115752.F661@10.0.0.1>
	<20070531091419.S826@besplex.bde.org> <20070531010631.N661@10.0.0.1>
	<20070601154833.O4207@besplex.bde.org> <20070601014601.I799@10.0.0.1>
	<20070601200348.G6201@delplex.bde.org> <20070601123530.B606@10.0.0.1>
	<20070604160036.N1084@besplex.bde.org> <46652D17.5090903@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updated rusage patch
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:45:36 -0000

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Attilio Rao wrote:

> Bruce Evans wrote:
>> ...
>> The bug seems to be that proc0_post() doesn't know anything about the
>> rusage fields in the thread struct.  Until recently, it was only missing
>> initialization of td_*ticks.  Now it is missing initialization of
>> td_runtime too, so the bug is more obvious.
>
> Yes, I always wondered why proc0_post() doesn't initialize [s,i,u]ticks too.
> However, could you please give a look and a try to this patch:
> http://users.gufi.org/~rookie/works/patches/schedlock/proc_post.diff
>
> and see if it solves your problem.

This can probably be fixed more simply by calling rufetch() to reset the
time state in threads as a side effect.  Do this before resetting the
state in the process.

ANother minor problem is that proc0_post() isn't the right place to
reset the time state except for proc0.  It hacks on some of the time
state for all processes and thus for all CPUs, but only resets switchtime
and switchticks for the current CPU.  Resetting of switchtime and
switchticks for startup of other CPUs now seems to be in sched_throw().
I think this is not properly synchronous with the resetting of the
rest of the state, but the errors from this are tiny.

Bruce