Re: [PATCH] trace/hwlat: Do not restart per-cpu threads if they are already running

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:02:37 +0200
Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 02/03/2023 13:49, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> > Hi Tero,
> >
> > On 3/2/23 08:36, Tero Kristo wrote:  
> >> Check if the hwlatd thread for the cpu is already running, before
> >> starting a new one. This avoids running multiple instances of the same
> >> CPU thread on the system. Also, do not wipe the contents of the
> >> per-cpu kthread data when starting the tracer, as this can completely
> >> forget about already running instances and start new additional per-cpu
> >> threads. Fixes issues where fiddling with either the mode of the hwlat
> >> tracer or doing cpu-hotplugs messes up the internal book-keeping
> >> resulting in stale hwlatd threads.  
> > Thanks for your patch.
> >
> > Would you mind explaining how do you hit the problem? that is, how can
> > I reproduce the same problem you faced.  
> 
> For example, this script snippet reproduces it for me every time:
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
> echo 0 > tracing_on
> echo hwlat > current_tracer
> echo per-cpu > hwlat_detector/mode
> echo 100000 > hwlat_detector/width
> echo 200000 > hwlat_detector/window
> echo 200 > tracing_thresh
> echo 1 > tracing_on

I did the above and saw this:

 # ps aux | grep hwlat
root        1410 36.2  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/0]
root        1411 36.7  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/1]
root        1412 36.4  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/2]
root        1413 36.7  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/3]
root        1414 36.7  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/4]
root        1415 36.5  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/5]
root        1417 36.4  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/6]
root        1418 36.6  0.0      0     0 ?        S    18:10   0:22 [hwlatd/7]
root        1426 33.1  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/0]
root        1427 33.1  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/1]
root        1428 32.9  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/2]
root        1429 32.9  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/3]
root        1430 32.8  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/4]
root        1431 33.2  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/5]
root        1432 33.2  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/6]
root        1433 33.2  0.0      0     0 ?        S    18:10   0:11 [hwlatd/7]
root        1521  0.0  0.0   6332  2048 pts/0    S+   18:22   0:00 grep hwlat

Which I'm guessing is bad (having two of each hwlatd/#).

> 
> Another case where something wonky happens is if you offline/online a 
> large number of CPUs (which takes a lot of time), and you start/disable 
> the hwlat tracer at the same time.
> 

After applying the patch and running the same commands,  I have this:

 # ps aux | grep hwlat
root         768 40.7  0.0      0     0 ?        S    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/0]
root         769 39.7  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/1]
root         770 39.8  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/2]
root         771 39.4  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/3]
root         772 40.5  0.0      0     0 ?        S    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/4]
root         773 40.5  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/5]
root         775 41.0  0.0      0     0 ?        S    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/6]
root         776 41.3  0.0      0     0 ?        R    18:23   0:10 [hwlatd/7]
root         781  0.0  0.0   6332  2048 pts/0    S+   18:25   0:00 grep hwlat

Looks as if this does fix the issue.

> >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c b/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> >> index d440ddd5fd8b..c4945f8adc11 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_hwlat.c
> >> @@ -492,6 +492,10 @@ static int start_cpu_kthread(unsigned int cpu)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct task_struct *kthread;
> >>   
> >> +	/* Do not start a new hwlatd thread if it is already running */
> >> +	if (per_cpu(hwlat_per_cpu_data, cpu).kthread)
> >> +		return 0;
> >> +
> >>   	kthread = kthread_run_on_cpu(kthread_fn, NULL, cpu, "hwlatd/%u");
> >>   	if (IS_ERR(kthread)) {
> >>   		pr_err(BANNER "could not start sampling thread\n");
> >> @@ -584,9 +588,6 @@ static int start_per_cpu_kthreads(struct trace_array *tr)
> >>   	 */
> >>   	cpumask_and(current_mask, cpu_online_mask, tr->tracing_cpumask);
> >>   
> >> -	for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> >> -		per_cpu(hwlat_per_cpu_data, cpu).kthread = NULL;
> >> -

I believe this is two different bugs (the two hunks). This should be two
patches.

Please add the reproducer above to the commit log in a v2.

Thanks,

-- Steve


> >>   	for_each_cpu(cpu, current_mask) {
> >>   		retval = start_cpu_kthread(cpu);
> >>   		if (retval)