From b5b514d543f20fa4111eb69abaf6c06b185b454e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ken Chen Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 14:05:16 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] latencytop: fix per task accumulator commit 38715258aa2e8cd94bd4aafadc544e5104efd551 upstream. Per task latencytop accumulator prematurely terminates due to erroneous placement of latency_record_count. It should be incremented whenever a new record is allocated instead of increment on every latencytop event. Also fix search iterator to only search known record events instead of blindly searching all pre-allocated space. Signed-off-by: Ken Chen Reviewed-by: Arjan van de Ven Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/latencytop.c | 17 ++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/latencytop.c b/kernel/latencytop.c index ca07c5c0c914..e99e7cd9cf47 100644 --- a/kernel/latencytop.c +++ b/kernel/latencytop.c @@ -195,14 +195,7 @@ __account_scheduler_latency(struct task_struct *tsk, int usecs, int inter) account_global_scheduler_latency(tsk, &lat); - /* - * short term hack; if we're > 32 we stop; future we recycle: - */ - tsk->latency_record_count++; - if (tsk->latency_record_count >= LT_SAVECOUNT) - goto out_unlock; - - for (i = 0; i < LT_SAVECOUNT; i++) { + for (i = 0; i < tsk->latency_record_count; i++) { struct latency_record *mylat; int same = 1; @@ -228,8 +221,14 @@ __account_scheduler_latency(struct task_struct *tsk, int usecs, int inter) } } + /* + * short term hack; if we're > 32 we stop; future we recycle: + */ + if (tsk->latency_record_count >= LT_SAVECOUNT) + goto out_unlock; + /* Allocated a new one: */ - i = tsk->latency_record_count; + i = tsk->latency_record_count++; memcpy(&tsk->latency_record[i], &lat, sizeof(struct latency_record)); out_unlock: -- 2.39.5