From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5588C433DF for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3D8122D2C for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="Vqa0/MeE"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="kN9sYWpF"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="MLXgfR34" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A3D8122D2C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To: Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=ssiwP+qHofZC9oIm6MV4Ci/PBkrQNT7aaxRjDEtj/74=; b=Vqa0/MeE2/1Zik80gUcTBa39y AC+vNunV8HZx0h4+WMJlk47iO2akSa2wO49E3MbO4W856sByE/1iAanld1eLC9dv1k/5KzBjGxlno GzTOfkB4Ly8D33yiVOTvp6135RYkl6t3lq0mmCu/2JayfuJo/LwCDoI1i7F0L2HX/iVWYMWfgtY8c zSo+GvCIANTI49Af+1YXoBIz/qyTWhAbQQFprD30cJsJkyAij9+cmku/kmQ836FAkBUOBkj/P5tV/ Mm0PBqhXglEZaIJYdZqnJUQM9rJDY6bI7vxFK9hwyFRg8n+ZS60FLn18Uij63RDzU+tnPj4g+n9SE IoXUXPabg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1k3cIS-0001o1-WE; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 09:34:49 +0000 Received: from galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1k3cIP-0001mV-TX for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 09:34:46 +0000 From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1596706483; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fQkbKY9HMHdIDVxo57b/7ooYqvcFkMgq0/3YSoWs1eI=; b=kN9sYWpFBqxH8i+Q+XfIJ8K3gXFkwExErJzky6iYhLWWPcVa2Z+p+OkEvD+GisZSXAeaLZ /oJ9kuejzW+IncznugGgptjhxw1+7hzVMcsFt7Y1Oq4issSKGHiO8rU7Rs5jqhzql0diX2 2oG3d8F9RifH6uyXVYIIZqNNKOuJmzgMFr7kSEomrSqabk5OASsk4BB+EN+HwRxo7IqWBZ zoRt4BEcLoNSg66M2m8QbTb2dRdkf7tE/7hJ4bjWqnvjmFwRE7dmSMQT6GFb35Fxk9YSpH n8j4k/ev4EXmFfg2P1UeeSmzVNT1JD2pVHXwXZN5cCxzYfIGBmWpyeLkIjCxzA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1596706483; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fQkbKY9HMHdIDVxo57b/7ooYqvcFkMgq0/3YSoWs1eI=; b=MLXgfR34ZN2c7p471X0+h9DeZYNO1M5vJ4NsJRZZh/+fSvjbiWc5sKSQu+R2OqaUwHFJ4S b72tNLPsH2m+vSBA== To: peterz@infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] arm64: defconfig: Disable fine-grained task level IRQ time accounting In-Reply-To: <20200805134002.GQ2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <877dumbtoi.fsf@kurt> <20200729094943.lsmhsqlnl7rlnl6f@skbuf> <87mu3ho48v.fsf@kurt> <20200730082228.r24zgdeiofvwxijm@skbuf> <873654m9zi.fsf@kurt> <87lfiwm2bj.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200803114112.mrcuupz4ir5uqlp6@skbuf> <87d047n4oh.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <875z9zmt4i.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200805134002.GQ2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2020 11:34:42 +0200 Message-ID: <877duci0ct.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200806_053446_077919_597C4BCC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.58 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mw@semihalf.com, paulmck@kernel.org, Anna-Maria Gleixner , catalin.marinas@arm.com, Alison Wang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, leoyang.li@nxp.com, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com, Kurt Kanzenbach , Vladimir Oltean , will@kernel.org, Valentin Schneider , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org peterz@infradead.org writes: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 09:22:53PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> totaltime = irqtime + tasktime >> >> Ignoring irqtime and pretending that totaltime is what the scheduler >> can control and deal with is naive at best. > > Well no, that's what we call system overhead and is assumed to be > included in the 'error margin'. > > The way things are set up is that we say that, by default, RT tasks can > consume 95% of cputime and the remaining 5% is sufficient to keep the > system alive. > > Those 5% include all system overhead, IRQs, RCU, !RT workqueues etc.. > > Obviously IRQ_TIME accounting changes the balance a bit, but that's what > it is. We can't really do anything better. > > Apparently this SoC has significant IRQ time for some reason. Also, > relying on RT throttling for 'correct' behaviour is also wrong. What > needs to be done is find who is using all this RT time and why, that > isn't right. It's a test case and we know already who is using the time. But that's not the point. A runaway RT task resulting in a RCU stall or whatever lockup of the system is definitely not the right answer. The throttler, as much as it's a horrible hack, is there to prevent this and to give the admin a chance to pinpoint and kill that thing instead of having to press the reset button and scratching head what might have caused this. Thanks, tglx _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel