From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca (Michel Dagenais)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:33:09 -0400
Subject: [ltt-dev] sys time
In-Reply-To: <8d94e9280810170940r7a0eff65se68d7636acbb0d33@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d94e9280810170558j5b9ed8d1q7da37da677c7bf7d@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d94e9280810170606o729767f3p839c1c3a59c9565d@mail.gmail.com>
	<48F8AEBD.2030303@polymtl.ca> <20081017162849.GD5696@Krystal>
	<8d94e9280810170940r7a0eff65se68d7636acbb0d33@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1224264789.16630.140.camel@localhost>

On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 18:40 +0200, Gian Lorenzo Meocci wrote:
> I agree with you but this don't resolv my problem. Infact my problem
> is that "time" give me 1.74 sec of sys time when analising lttng-trace
> I obtain only 0.87.

The time command can be pretty far off when a process is making a lot of
system calls. It usually underestimates the user time, which is
consistent with what you are seeing. Basically, the kernel simply counts
a full jiffy for the process currently executing when the timer
generates an interrupt. If a process makes a lot of system calls, it
will often be scheduled at the beginning of a timer interval but will
quickly yield to another process and not be there at the timer
interrupt.