From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Free up pf flag PF_KSOFTIRQD -v2
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:17:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1293009446.2170.71.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1292980144-28796-2-git-send-email-venki@google.com>
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 17:09 -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> Patchset:
> This is Part 2 of
> "Proper kernel irq time accounting -v4"
> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail//linux/kernel/1010.0/01175.html
>
> and applies 2.6.37-rc7.
>
> Part 1 solves the way irqs are accounted in scheduler and tasks. This
> patchset solves how irq times are reported in /proc/stat and also not
> to include irq time in task->stime, etc.
>
> Example:
> Running a cpu intensive loop and network intensive nc on a 4 CPU system
> and looking at 'top' output.
>
> With vanilla kernel:
> Cpu0 : 0.0% us, 0.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 99.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si
> Cpu1 : 100.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
> Cpu2 : 1.3% us, 27.2% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 71.4% si
> Cpu3 : 1.6% us, 1.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 96.7% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 7555 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 100 0.0 0:15.79 nc
> 7563 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 100 0.0 0:13.13 loop
>
> Notes:
> * Both tasks show 100% CPU, even when one of them is stuck on a CPU thats
> processing 70% softirq.
> * no hardirq time.
>
>
> With "Part 1" patches:
> Cpu0 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
> Cpu1 : 100.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
> Cpu2 : 2.0% us, 30.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 67.4% si
> Cpu3 : 0.7% us, 0.7% sy, 0.3% ni, 98.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 6289 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 100 0.0 2:18.67 loop
> 5737 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 33 0.0 0:26.72 nc
>
> Notes:
> * Tasks show 100% CPU and 33% CPU that correspond to their non-irq exec time.
> * no hardirq time.
>
>
> With "Part 1 + Part 2" patches:
> Cpu0 : 1.3% us, 1.0% sy, 0.3% ni, 97.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si
> Cpu1 : 99.3% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.7% hi, 0.0% si
> Cpu2 : 1.3% us, 31.5% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 8.3% hi, 58.9% si
> Cpu3 : 1.0% us, 2.0% sy, 0.3% ni, 95.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.7% hi, 1.0% si
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 20929 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 99 0.0 3:48.25 loop
> 20796 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 33 0.0 2:38.65 nc
>
> Notes:
> * Both task exec time and hard irq time reported correctly.
> * hi and si time are based on fine granularity info and not on samples.
> * getrusage would give proper utime/stime split not including irq times
> in that ratio.
> * Other places that report user/sys time like, cgroup cpuacct.stat will
> now include only non-irq exectime.
>
> This patch:
Your 0/x seem repeated in here for some reason... I would expect on the
below little bit.
> Cleanup patch, freeing up PF_KSOFTIRQD and use per_cpu ksoftirqd pointer
> instead, as suggested by Eric Dumazet.
>
> Tested-by: Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
> ---
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-22 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-22 1:08 [PATCH 0/5] Proper kernel irq time reporting -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 1:09 ` [PATCH 1/5] Free up pf flag PF_KSOFTIRQD -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-01-26 12:11 ` [tip:sched/core] softirqs: Free up pf flag PF_KSOFTIRQD tip-bot for Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 1:09 ` [PATCH 2/5] Add nsecs_to_cputime64 interface for asm-generic -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 8:30 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2010-12-22 14:23 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 15:25 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-01-26 12:12 ` [tip:sched/core] time: Add nsecs_to_cputime64 interface for asm-generic tip-bot for Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 1:09 ` [PATCH 3/5] Refactor account_system_time separating id-update -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-01-26 12:12 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Refactor account_system_time separating id-update tip-bot for Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 1:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] Export ns irqtimes through /proc/stat -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-01-26 12:13 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Export ns irqtimes through /proc/stat tip-bot for Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 1:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] Account ksoftirqd time as cpustat softirq -v2 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 13:59 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-12-22 14:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 14:17 ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-01-26 12:13 ` [tip:sched/core] softirqs: Account ksoftirqd time as cpustat softirq tip-bot for Venkatesh Pallipadi
2011-01-06 15:31 ` [PATCH 0/5] Proper kernel irq time reporting -v2 Shaun Ruffell
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=1293009446.2170.71.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sruffell@digium.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venki@google.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