Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:06:40 +0200 From: Ian FREISLICH <if@hetzner.co.za> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, current@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches Message-ID: <E1F20HI-000IRb-0x@hetzner.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:09:54 %2B0100." <19559.1138216194@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Poul-Henning Kamp" wrote: > In message <E1F1kOm-000FY2-8Z@hetzner.co.za>, Ian FREISLICH writes: > > >"One second's worth of the computer's processing time, which is > >based on actual machine cycles used, not calendar time." ? > > > >Is the getrusage() manual page out of date? > > Yes. > > It was written before anybody had gotten the rather weird idea to > have a CPU change frequency. Back then it was all about running > as fast as possible all the time. > > We are therefore forced to try to divine the intent behind the text, > and as somebody who were around back in the eighties I can testify > that the intent was to be able to bill computer users for CPU > instructions. I wonder how many people still bill for CPU time? I'd go for the faster context switches. Ian -- Ian Freislich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1F20HI-000IRb-0x>