Subject: Re: Further works on yamt-idlelwp
To: None <rmind@NetBSD.org>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/06/2007 06:59:14
> > I think both of those should be per-LWP, and the sysctl/libkvm interface
> > should mimic the old behaviour by adding the values for all LWPs in a
> > process.
> As I understand, you would tend to "LWPize" this part, hence, there would be
> more data moving from proc to lwp. One should also keep in mind that top(1)
> and ps(1) interfaces are defined by POSIX.
> Can you elaborate with this?
i don't think top is in posix.
anyway i guess they can be calculated on-demand as we currently do
for p_rtime.
YAMAMOTO Taakshi