Re: [PATCH v2] sched/cputime: add steal clock warp handling

Rik van Riel
2016-06-06T14:22:22Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2309 bytes --]

On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:44 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 03/06/2016 15:10, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:21 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
> > >
> > > I observed that sometimes st is 100% instantaneous, then idle is
> > > 100%
> > > even if there is a cpu hog on the guest cpu after the cpu hotplug
> > > comes
> > > back(N.B. this can not always be readily reproduced). I add trace
> > > to
> > > capture it as below:
> > >
> > > cpuhp/1-12    [001] d.h1   167.461657: account_process_tick:
> > > steal =
> > > 1291385514, prev_steal_time = 0
> > > cpuhp/1-12    [001] d.h1   167.461659: account_process_tick:
> > > steal_jiffies = 1291
> > > <idle>-0     [001] d.h1   167.462663: account_process_tick: steal
> > > =
> > > 18732255, prev_steal_time = 1291000000
> > > <idle>-0     [001] d.h1   167.462664: account_process_tick:
> > > steal_jiffies = 18446744072437
> > >
> > > The steal clock warp and then steal_jiffies overflow.
> > >
> > > Rik also pointed out to me:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have seen stuff like that with live migration too, in the
> > > > past
> > > This patch adds steal clock warp handling by a safe threshold to
> > > only
> > > apply steal times that are positive and smaller than one second
> > > (as
> > > long as nohz_full has the one second timer tick left), ignoring
> > > intervals
> > > that are negative or longer than a second, and using those to
> > > sync
> > > up
> > > the guest with the host.
> > >
> > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> > > Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > > Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: Radim <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Sorry for being late---again, I'd like to give a shot to a fix in KVM
> guest code.

This is in the guest code.

Do you mean a fix on the host side?

--
All Rights Reversed.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]