The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING, finer accounting of CPU irq time
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:27:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100920092734.3f46af9f@mschwide.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1284897666.2275.638.camel@laptop>

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:01:06 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 13:21 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 18:56 -0700, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> > > +void account_system_vtime(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > > +{
> > > +       unsigned long flags;
> > > +       int cpu;
> > > +       u64 now, delta;
> > > +
> > > +       if (!sched_clock_irqtime)
> > > +               return;
> > > +
> > > +       local_irq_save(flags);
> > > +
> > > +       cpu = task_cpu(tsk);
> > > +       now = sched_clock();
> > > +       delta = now - per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu);
> > > +       per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu) = now;
> > > +       if (hardirq_count())
> > > +               per_cpu(cpu_hardirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> > > +       else if (softirq_count())
> > > +               per_cpu(cpu_softirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> > > +
> > > +       local_irq_restore(flags);
> > > +} 
> > 
> > This seems to suggest you count time double if a hardirq hits while
> > we're doing softirqs, but being as this is an incomplete api its very
> > hard to tell indeed.
> 
> OK, so by virtue of calling the same function on _enter and _exit its
> not incomplete, just weird.

That is the same with CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y. irq_enter/irq_exit
call account_system_vtime, the function then uses the preempt/softirq/
hardirq counter to find out which context is currently active.

> And it won't account time double, since it uses irq_start_time to
> compute deltas between invocations and will attribute that delta to only
> one state.

irq_start_time is a bit misleading, it is a time stamp of the last update.
The confusing part (which deserves a comment) is the fact that the delta
is not added to anything if hardirq_count and softirq_count are zero.

> You still do have the problem with local_bh_disable() though, since you
> cannot distinguish between having bh disabled and processing softirq.
> 
> So a hardirq that hits while you have bh disabled will inflate your
> softirq time.
> 
> A possible solution is to have local_bh_{disable,enable} {add,sub}
> 2*SOFTIRQ_OFFSET and have the processing use SOFTIRQ_OFFSET, will need a
> bit of a code shuffle though.

Hmm, that bug is valid for CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y as well.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-20  7:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-17  1:56 [PATCH 0/6] Proper kernel irq time accounting Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 1/6] Consolidate account_system_vtime extern declaration Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 2/6] Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING, finer accounting of CPU irq time Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-19 11:11   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20 17:13     ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-20 17:23       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-19 11:21   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-19 11:42     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-19 12:01     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20  7:27       ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2010-09-20  9:27         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20 17:16           ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-20 17:26             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-27 20:35               ` [PATCH] si time accounting accounts bh_disable'd time to si Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-27 20:53                 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-09-27 21:11                   ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-27 21:16                     ` Eric Dumazet
2010-09-30 11:17                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 3/6] x86: Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING in x86 Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 4/6] sched: Do not account irq time to current task Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-19 11:28   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20 17:33     ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-20 17:38       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20 17:40         ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 5/6] sched: Remove irq time from available CPU power Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-19 11:31   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-20 17:38     ` Venkatesh Pallipadi
2010-09-17  1:56 ` [PATCH 6/6] Export per cpu hardirq and softirq time in proc Venkatesh Pallipadi

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=20100920092734.3f46af9f@mschwide.boeblingen.de.ibm.com \
    --to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.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