public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Kieran Bingham <kbingham@kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Xin Zhao <jackzxcui1989@163.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] powerpc/time: Prepare to stop elapsing in dynticks-idle
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 12:14:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a0c6e65c-3331-402a-94eb-14ba7f4b7ba7@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a20beb34-0e4b-4063-b6b0-6c5886bbb971@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Hegde,

Le 25/02/2026 à 11:34, Shrikanth Hegde a écrit :
> Hi Christophe.
> 
> On 2/25/26 3:15 PM, Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) wrote:
>>
>> Hope it is more explicit now.
>>
> 
> Got it. The main concern was around with additional computation that 
> sched_clock,
> not any additional paths per se.
> 
> yes, that would be possible,
> 
> 
> How about we do below? This adds only one subtraction.
> This achieves the same outcome.

It adds a bit more than just a substration. It adds a call to an extern 
fonction.

00000164 <my_account_cpu_user_entry>:
  164:	94 21 ff f0 	stwu    r1,-16(r1)
  168:	7c 08 02 a6 	mflr    r0
  16c:	90 01 00 14 	stw     r0,20(r1)
  170:	93 e1 00 0c 	stw     r31,12(r1)
  174:	7f ec 42 e6 	mftb    r31
  178:	48 00 00 01 	bl      178 <my_account_cpu_user_entry+0x14>
			178: R_PPC_REL24	get_boot_tb
  17c:	81 02 00 08 	lwz     r8,8(r2)
  180:	81 22 00 28 	lwz     r9,40(r2)
  184:	7c 84 f8 50 	subf    r4,r4,r31
  188:	7d 29 40 50 	subf    r9,r9,r8
  18c:	7d 29 22 14 	add     r9,r9,r4
  190:	90 82 00 24 	stw     r4,36(r2)
  194:	91 22 00 08 	stw     r9,8(r2)
  198:	80 01 00 14 	lwz     r0,20(r1)
  19c:	83 e1 00 0c 	lwz     r31,12(r1)
  1a0:	7c 08 03 a6 	mtlr    r0
  1a4:	38 21 00 10 	addi    r1,r1,16
  1a8:	4e 80 00 20 	blr

000001ac <my_account_cpu_user_exit>:
  1ac:	94 21 ff f0 	stwu    r1,-16(r1)
  1b0:	7c 08 02 a6 	mflr    r0
  1b4:	90 01 00 14 	stw     r0,20(r1)
  1b8:	93 e1 00 0c 	stw     r31,12(r1)
  1bc:	7f ec 42 e6 	mftb    r31
  1c0:	48 00 00 01 	bl      1c0 <my_account_cpu_user_exit+0x14>
			1c0: R_PPC_REL24	get_boot_tb
  1c4:	81 02 00 0c 	lwz     r8,12(r2)
  1c8:	81 22 00 24 	lwz     r9,36(r2)
  1cc:	7c 84 f8 50 	subf    r4,r4,r31
  1d0:	7d 29 40 50 	subf    r9,r9,r8
  1d4:	7d 29 22 14 	add     r9,r9,r4
  1d8:	90 82 00 28 	stw     r4,40(r2)
  1dc:	91 22 00 0c 	stw     r9,12(r2)
  1e0:	80 01 00 14 	lwz     r0,20(r1)
  1e4:	83 e1 00 0c 	lwz     r31,12(r1)
  1e8:	7c 08 03 a6 	mtlr    r0
  1ec:	38 21 00 10 	addi    r1,r1,16
  1f0:	4e 80 00 20 	blr


I really still can't see the point of this substraction.

At one place we do

	tb1 = mftb1;

	acct->utime += (tb1 - acct->starttime_user);
	acct->starttime = tb1;

At the other place we do

	tb2 = mftb2;

	acct->stime += (tb2 - acct->starttime);
	acct->starttime_user = tb2;

So at the end we have

	acct->utime += mftb1 - mftb2;
	acct->stime += mftb2 - mftb1;

You want to change to
	tb1 = mftb1 - boot_tb;
	tb2 = mftb2 - boot_tb;

At the end we would get

	acct->utime += mftb1 - boot_tb - mftb2 + boot_tb = mftb1 - mftb2;
	acct->stime += mftb2 - boot_tb - mftb1 + boot_tb = mftb2 - mftb1;

So what's the point in doing such a useless substract that disappears at 
the end ? What am I missing ?

Christophe


  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-25 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-06 14:22 [PATCH 00/15 v2] tick/sched: Refactor idle cputime accounting Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 01/15] sched/idle: Handle offlining first in idle loop Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-18 18:22   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 02/15] sched/cputime: Remove superfluous and error prone kcpustat_field() parameter Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-18 18:25   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 03/15] sched/cputime: Correctly support generic vtime idle time Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 04/15] powerpc/time: Prepare to stop elapsing in dynticks-idle Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-19 18:30   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-24 15:41     ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-02-25  7:46       ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-25  9:45         ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-02-25 10:34           ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-25 11:14             ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) [this message]
2026-02-25 13:33               ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-25 13:54                 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-02-25 17:47                   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-25 17:59                     ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-02-26  4:06                       ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-26  7:32         ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-02-26 12:57           ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 05/15] s390/time: " Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 06/15] tick/sched: Unify idle cputime accounting Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 07/15] cpufreq: ondemand: Simplify idle cputime granularity test Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 08/15] tick/sched: Remove nohz disabled special case in cputime fetch Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 09/15] tick/sched: Move dyntick-idle cputime accounting to cputime code Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 10/15] tick/sched: Remove unused fields Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 11/15] tick/sched: Account tickless idle cputime only when tick is stopped Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 12/15] tick/sched: Consolidate idle time fetching APIs Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 22:35   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 13/15] sched/cputime: Provide get_cpu_[idle|iowait]_time_us() off-case Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 14/15] sched/cputime: Handle idle irqtime gracefully Frederic Weisbecker
2026-03-03 11:11   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-03-20 14:32     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-06 14:22 ` [PATCH 15/15] sched/cputime: Handle dyntick-idle steal time correctly Frederic Weisbecker
2026-03-03 11:17   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-03-24 14:53     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-11 13:43 ` [PATCH 00/15 v2] tick/sched: Refactor idle cputime accounting Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-11 17:06   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-12  7:02     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-02-18 18:11     ` Shrikanth Hegde
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-01-16 14:51 [PATCH 00/15] " Frederic Weisbecker
2026-01-16 14:51 ` [PATCH 04/15] powerpc/time: Prepare to stop elapsing in dynticks-idle Frederic Weisbecker
2026-02-25 17:53   ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)

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=a0c6e65c-3331-402a-94eb-14ba7f4b7ba7@kernel.org \
    --to=chleroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jackzxcui1989@163.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kbingham@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox