linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: "Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@baidu.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"vschneid@redhat.com" <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	"mgorman@suse.de" <mgorman@suse.de>,
	"bsegall@google.com" <bsegall@google.com>,
	"dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"juri.lelli@redhat.com" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [????] Re: [????] Re: divide error in x86 and cputime
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 20:30:57 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250707203057.1b2af73d@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92674f89641f466b9ebbdf7681614ed3@baidu.com>

On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 00:10:54 +0000
"Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@baidu.com> wrote:

> >         stime = mul_u64_u64_div_u64(stime, rtime, stime + utime);
> > +       /*
> > +        * Because mul_u64_u64_div_u64() can approximate on some
> > +        * achitectures; enforce the constraint that: a*b/(b+c) <= a.
> > +        */
> > +       if (unlikely(stime > rtime))
> > +               stime = rtime;  
> 
> 
> My 5.10 has not this patch " sched/cputime: Fix mul_u64_u64_div_u64() precision for cputime ",
> but I am sure this patch can not fix this overflow issue, Since division error happened in mul_u64_u64_div_u64()

Have you tried it? Or are you just making an assumption?

How can you be so sure? Did you even *look* at the commit?

    sched/cputime: Fix mul_u64_u64_div_u64() precision for cputime
    
    In extreme test scenarios:
    the 14th field utime in /proc/xx/stat is greater than sum_exec_runtime,
    utime = 18446744073709518790 ns, rtime = 135989749728000 ns
    
    In cputime_adjust() process, stime is greater than rtime due to
    mul_u64_u64_div_u64() precision problem.
    before call mul_u64_u64_div_u64(),
    stime = 175136586720000, rtime = 135989749728000, utime = 1416780000.
    after call mul_u64_u64_div_u64(),
    stime = 135989949653530
    
    unsigned reversion occurs because rtime is less than stime.
    utime = rtime - stime = 135989749728000 - 135989949653530
                          = -199925530
                          = (u64)18446744073709518790
    
    Trigger condition:
      1). User task run in kernel mode most of time
      2). ARM64 architecture
      3). TICK_CPU_ACCOUNTING=y
          CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_NATIVE is not set
    
    Fix mul_u64_u64_div_u64() conversion precision by reset stime to rtime


When stime ends up greater than rtime, it causes utime to go NEGATIVE!

That means *YES* it can overflow a u64 number. That's your bug.

Next time, look to see if there's fixes in the code that is triggering
issues for you and test them out, before bothering upstream.

Goodbye.

-- Steve

  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-08  0:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-07  8:14 divide error in x86 and cputime Li,Rongqing
2025-07-07 15:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 22:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-07 22:20   ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 22:33     ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 23:00       ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-08 11:00         ` David Laight
2025-07-08  1:40       ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08  1:53         ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08  1:58           ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08  2:05             ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08  2:17               ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-08  9:58                 ` David Laight
2025-07-07 22:30   ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-07 23:41     ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-07 23:53       ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08  0:10         ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08  0:30           ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2025-07-08  1:17             ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08  1:41               ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 10:35             ` [????] Re: [????] " David Laight
2025-07-08 11:12               ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08  0:23       ` 答复: " Li,Rongqing

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=20250707203057.1b2af73d@gandalf.local.home \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lirongqing@baidu.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).