From: Bitao Hu <yaoma@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
dianders@chromium.org, liusong@linux.alibaba.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, pmladek@suse.com,
kernelfans@gmail.com, deller@gmx.de, npiggin@gmail.com,
tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com,
jan.kiszka@siemens.com
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 3/4] genirq: Avoid summation loops for /proc/interrupts
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 19:20:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e78357ae-7b00-446c-b010-3bd770892c9e@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87le769s0w.ffs@tglx>
Hi,
On 2024/2/27 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26 2024 at 10:09, Bitao Hu wrote:
>> We could use the irq_desc::tot_count member to avoid the summation
>> loop for interrupts which are not marked as 'PER_CPU' interrupts in
>> 'show_interrupts'. This could reduce the time overhead of reading
>> /proc/interrupts.
>
> "Could" is not really a technical term. Either we do or we do not. Also
> please provide context for your change and avoid the 'We'.
OK.
>
>> --- a/include/linux/irqdesc.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/irqdesc.h
>> @@ -121,6 +121,8 @@ static inline void irq_unlock_sparse(void) { }
>> extern struct irq_desc irq_desc[NR_IRQS];
>> #endif
>>
>> +extern bool irq_is_nmi(struct irq_desc *desc);
>> +
>
> If at all this wants to be in kernel/irq/internal.h. There is zero
> reason to expose this globally.
>
>> -static bool irq_is_nmi(struct irq_desc *desc)
>> +bool irq_is_nmi(struct irq_desc *desc)
>> {
>> return desc->istate & IRQS_NMI;
>> }
>
> If at all this really wants to be a static inline in internals.h, but
> instead of blindly copying code this can be done smarter:
>
> unsigned int kstat_irq_desc(struct irq_desc *desc)
> {
> unsigned int sum = 0;
> int cpu;
>
> if (!irq_settings_is_per_cpu_devid(desc) &&
> !irq_settings_is_per_cpu(desc) &&
> !irq_is_nmi(desc))
> return data_race(desc->tot_count);
>
> for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> sum += data_race(*per_cpu_ptr(desc->kstat_irqs, cpu));
> return sum;
> }
>
> and then let kstat_irqs() and show_interrupts() use it. See?
I have a concern. kstat_irqs() uses for_each_possible_cpu() for
summation. However, show_interrupts() uses for_each_online_cpu(),
which means it only outputs interrupt statistics for online cpus.
If we use for_each_possible_cpu() in show_interrupts() to calculate
'any_count', there could be a problem with the following scenario:
If an interrupt has a count of zero on online cpus but a non-zero
count on possible cpus, then 'any_count' would not be zero, and the
statistics for that interrupt would be output, which is not the
desired behavior for show_interrupts(). Therefore, I think it's not
good to have kstat_irqs() and show_interrupts() both use the same
logic. What do you think?
>
> With that a proper changelog would be:
>
> show_interrupts() unconditionally accumulates the per CPU interrupt
> statistics to determine whether an interrupt was ever raised.
>
> This can be avoided for all interrupts which are not strictly per CPU
> and not of type NMI because those interrupts provide already an
> accumulated counter. The required logic is already implemented in
> kstat_irqs().
>
> Split the inner access logic out of kstat_irqs() and use it for
> kstat_irqs() and show_interrupts() to avoid the accumulation loop
> when possible.
>
Best Regards,
Bitao Hu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-27 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-26 2:09 [PATCHv10 0/4] *** Detect interrupt storm in softlockup *** Bitao Hu
2024-02-26 2:09 ` [PATCHv10 1/4] watchdog/softlockup: low-overhead detection of interrupt storm Bitao Hu
2024-02-26 2:09 ` [PATCHv10 2/4] genirq: Provide a snapshot mechanism for interrupt statistics Bitao Hu
2024-02-27 4:10 ` Liu Song
2024-02-26 2:09 ` [PATCHv10 3/4] genirq: Avoid summation loops for /proc/interrupts Bitao Hu
2024-02-27 7:48 ` Liu Song
2024-02-27 9:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-27 11:20 ` Bitao Hu [this message]
2024-02-27 15:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-28 6:07 ` Bitao Hu
2024-02-26 2:09 ` [PATCHv10 4/4] watchdog/softlockup: report the most frequent interrupts Bitao Hu
2024-02-27 9:02 ` Liu Song
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=e78357ae-7b00-446c-b010-3bd770892c9e@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=yaoma@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kernelfans@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=liusong@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).