From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
Spencer Candland <spencer@bluehost.com>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/2] cputimers/proc: do_task_stat()->thread_group_times() is racy and O(n) under ->siglock
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:19:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1269519557.12097.69.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100325121250.GA3664@redhat.com>
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 13:12 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Right, so from what I remember the issue is that, yes top et al rely on
> > that monotonicity,
>
> Really? So, do you think the change above will break user-space?
>
> How sad :/
IIRC top can give very funny results if you break it hard enough, it
likes to give 9999% cputime if the thing goes backwards over the sample
interval.
But I'm not sure your race is large enough to ever show up like that, so
it might all just work out, but in general it does tend to require
monotonic times.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-25 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-24 20:45 [RFC,PATCH 2/2] cputimers/proc: do_task_stat()->thread_group_times() is racy and O(n) under ->siglock Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-24 20:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-25 12:12 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 12:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-03-26 7:59 ` Stanislaw Gruszka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1269519557.12097.69.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@in.ibm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
--cc=spencer@bluehost.com \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.