From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fix idle ticks in cpu summary line of /proc/stat
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:31:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7592A6.8030500@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120330122308.18720283@de.ibm.com>
On 03/30/2012 03:53 PM, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:42:22 +0200 (CEST)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>
>>> OK, so the updated version of the patch looks like this. I am sorry but
>>> I had time to only compile test this...
>>> ---
>>> >From d12247f14c5f8b00ae97a87442f62e49227a759b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
>>> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:11:38 +0100
>>> Subject: [PATCH] nohz: fix idle ticks in cpu summary line of /proc/stat
>>>
>>> Git commit 09a1d34f8535ecf9 "nohz: Make idle/iowait counter update
>>> conditional" introduced a bug in regard to cpu hotplug. The effect is
>>> that the number of idle ticks in the cpu summary line in /proc/stat is
>>> still counting ticks for offline cpus.
>>>
>>> Reproduction is easy, just start a workload that keeps all cpus busy,
>>> switch off one or more cpus and then watch the idle field in top.
>>> On a dual-core with one cpu 100% busy and one offline cpu you will get
>>> something like this:
>>>
>>> %Cpu(s): 48.7 us, 1.3 sy, 0.0 ni, 50.0 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st
>>>
>>> The problem is that an offline cpu still has ts->idle_active == 1.
>>> To fix this we should make sure that the cpu is online when calling
>>> get_cpu_idle_time_us and get_cpu_iowait_time_us.
>>>
>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>> Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> Reported-by: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
>>
>> Martin, does that solve the problem for you ?
>
> Yes, the patch does solve the immediate problem. I just tested if again
> on x86 and s390, works fine. I would like to have another change though.
> The idle_sleep calculation in the scheduler is fine for x86 but for s390
> the arch_idle_time delivers a much better precision. A patch would look
> like this:
> --
> Subject: [PATCH] use arch_idle_time for idle and iowait times if available
>
> From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
>
> Git commit a25cac5198d4ff28 "proc: Consider NO_HZ when printing idle and
> iowait times" changes the code for /proc/stat to use get_cpu_idle_time_us
> and get_cpu_iowait_time_us if the system is running with nohz enabled.
> For architectures which define arch_idle_time (currently s390 only)
> this is a change for the worse. The result of arch_idle_time is supposed
> to be the exact sleep time of the target cpu and should be used instead
> of the value kept by the scheduler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> fs/proc/stat.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/fs/proc/stat.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/stat.c
> @@ -18,9 +18,30 @@
> #ifndef arch_irq_stat
> #define arch_irq_stat() 0
> #endif
> -#ifndef arch_idle_time
> -#define arch_idle_time(cpu) 0
> -#endif
> +
> +#ifdef arch_idle_time
> +
> +static cputime64_t get_idle_time(int cpu)
> +{
> + cputime64_t idle;
> +
> + idle = kcpustat_cpu(cpu).cpustat[CPUTIME_IDLE];
> + if (cpu_online(cpu) && !nr_iowait_cpu(cpu))
> + idle += arch_idle_time(cpu);
> + return idle;
> +}
> +
> +static cputime64_t get_iowait_time(int cpu)
> +{
> + cputime64_t iowait;
> +
> + iowait = kcpustat_cpu(cpu).cpustat[CPUTIME_IOWAIT];
> + if (cpu_online(cpu) && nr_iowait_cpu(cpu))
> + iowait += arch_idle_time(cpu);
> + return iowait;
> +}
> +
> +#else
>
> static u64 get_idle_time(int cpu)
> {
> @@ -29,11 +50,10 @@ static u64 get_idle_time(int cpu)
> if (cpu_online(cpu))
> idle_time = get_cpu_idle_time_us(cpu, NULL);
>
> - if (idle_time == -1ULL) {
> + if (idle_time == -1ULL)
> /* !NO_HZ or cpu offline so we can rely on cpustat.idle */
> idle = kcpustat_cpu(cpu).cpustat[CPUTIME_IDLE];
> - idle += arch_idle_time(cpu);
> - } else
> + else
> idle = usecs_to_cputime64(idle_time);
>
> return idle;
> @@ -55,6 +75,8 @@ static u64 get_iowait_time(int cpu)
> return iowait;
> }
>
> +#endif
> +
> static int show_stat(struct seq_file *p, void *v)
> {
> int i, j;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-30 11:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-11 22:26 [PATCH] fix idle ticks in cpu summary line of /proc/stat Martin Schwidefsky
2012-03-12 12:17 ` Michal Hocko
2012-03-12 14:17 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-03-12 14:48 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-12 15:39 ` Michal Hocko
2012-03-12 20:41 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-03-13 8:07 ` [PATCH v2] " Michal Hocko
2012-03-13 8:32 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-07-18 11:52 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-07-18 12:21 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-29 10:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-03-30 10:23 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-03-30 10:41 ` Michal Hocko
2012-03-30 11:01 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat [this message]
2012-03-30 13:58 ` [tip:timers/core] proc: stats: Use arch_idle_time for idle and iowait times if available tip-bot for Martin Schwidefsky
2012-03-30 22:54 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-02 6:51 ` Martin Schwidefsky
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=4F7592A6.8030500@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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