From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Fix wrong user and system time accouting against vtime sampling
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 20:01:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170410180143.GA18098@lerouge> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704101738240.2906@nanos>
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Apr 2017, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Offset the tick to avert jiffies_lock contention, and all ticks
> > + * alignment in order that the vtime sampling does not end up "in
> > + * phase" with the jiffies incrementing.
> > + */
> > + if (sched_skew_tick || tick_nohz_full_enabled()) {
> > u64 offset = ktime_to_ns(tick_period) >> 1;
> > do_div(offset, num_possible_cpus());
> > offset *= smp_processor_id();
>
> That's not a fix, that's just papering over the problem.
>
> offset = 1ms / 2 = 500us = 500000ns;
> offset /= 144 = 3472ns
>
> So CPU0 and CPU1 ticks are ~3 microseconds apart. That merily reduces the
> probability of the issue, but does not prevent it.
I worried about it but didn't realize it could be that tight.
So the alternative is the solution involving sched_clock() as the source for
cputime. Wanpeng Li could you please resubmit your patch that does that?
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-10 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-06 6:36 [PATCH] tick/nohz: Fix wrong user and system time accouting against vtime sampling Wanpeng Li
2017-04-06 14:36 ` Rik van Riel
2017-04-07 16:58 ` Luiz Capitulino
2017-04-10 15:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-04-10 18:01 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2017-04-10 21:51 ` Wanpeng Li
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=20170410180143.GA18098@lerouge \
--to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=lcapitulino@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.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