From: "Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@lycos.com>
To: mhocko@suse.cz
Cc: pomac@vapor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl,
tino.keitel@tikei.de
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] proc: Do not overflow get_{idle,iowait}_time for nohz (was: Re: Re: [REGRESSION] [Linux 3.2] top/htop and all other CPU usage)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 20:12:14 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <594802130.20617.1322856734286.JavaMail.mail@webmail10> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20111202175932.GA3894@tiehlicka.suse.cz
On Dec 2, 2011, Michal Hocko wrote:
> And the one with a more cleaned up changelog. No functional changes
> ---
> From 107887016b91de59194a93c751d040b05d5e37fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko <>
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:17:03 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] proc: Do not overflow get_{idle,iowait}_time for nohz
>
> Since a25cac51 [proc: Consider NO_HZ when printing idle and iowait times]
> we are reporting idle/io_wait time also while a CPU is tickless. We rely
> on get_{idle,iowait}_time functions to retrieve proper data.
>
> These functions, however, use usecs_to_cputime to translate micro
> seconds time to cputime64_t. This is just an alias to usecs_to_jiffies
> which reduces the data type from u64 to unsigned int and also checks
> whether the given parameter overflows jiffies_to_usecs(MAX_JIFFY_OFFSET)
> and returns MAX_JIFFY_OFFSET in that case.
>
> When do we overflow depends on CONFIG_HZ but especially for
> CONFIG_HZ_300 it is quite low (1431649781) so we are getting
> MAX_JIFFY_OFFSET for >3000s! until we overflow unsigned int.
> Just for reference CONFIG_100 has an overflow window around 20s,
> CONFIG_250 ~8s and CONFIG_1000 ~2s.
>
> This results in a bug when people saw [h]top going mad reporting 100%
> CPU usage even though there was basically no CPU load. The reason was
> simply that /proc/stat stopped reporting idle/io_wait changes (and
> reported MAX_JIFFY_OFFSET) and so the only change happening was for
> user system time.
>
> Let's use nsecs_to_jiffies64 instead which doesn't reduce the precision
> to 32b type and it is much more appropriate for cumulative time values
> (unlike usecs_to_jiffies which intended for timeout calculations).
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> ---
> fs/proc/stat.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/stat.c b/fs/proc/stat.c
> index 42b274d..2a30d67 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/stat.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/stat.c
> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ static cputime64_t get_idle_time(int cpu)
> idle = kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.idle;
> idle = cputime64_add(idle, arch_idle_time(cpu));
> } else
> - idle = usecs_to_cputime(idle_time);
> + idle = nsecs_to_jiffies64(1000 * idle_time);
>
> return idle;
> }
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ static cputime64_t get_iowait_time(int cpu)
> /* !NO_HZ so we can rely on cpustat.iowait */
> iowait = kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.iowait;
> else
> - iowait = usecs_to_cputime(iowait_time);
> + iowait = nsecs_to_jiffies64(1000 * iowait_time);
>
> return iowait;
> }
> --
> 1.7.7.3
Thank you, this patch has fixed the issue for me.
Tested-by: Artem S. Tashkinov <t.artem@mailcity.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-02 20:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-28 22:28 [REGRESSION] [Linux 3.2] top/htop and all other CPU usage pomac
2011-11-29 7:52 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 11:38 ` Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-29 12:31 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 12:44 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 12:54 ` Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-29 13:10 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 13:51 ` Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-29 22:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-30 10:12 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-30 19:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-12-01 14:07 ` Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 10:39 ` Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 13:35 ` Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 16:49 ` [PATCH] proc: Do not overflow get_{idle,iowait}_time for nohz (was: Re: Re: [REGRESSION] [Linux 3.2] top/htop and all other CPU usage) Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 17:59 ` Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 20:12 ` Artem S. Tashkinov [this message]
2011-12-05 8:56 ` Michal Hocko
2011-12-02 17:43 ` Re: Re: [REGRESSION] [Linux 3.2] top/htop and all other CPU usage Artem S. Tashkinov
2011-11-29 17:23 ` Ian Kumlien
2011-11-29 17:31 ` Ian Kumlien
2011-11-29 17:56 ` Michal Hocko
2011-11-29 18:37 ` Ian Kumlien
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=594802130.20617.1322856734286.JavaMail.mail@webmail10 \
--to=t.artem@lycos.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=pomac@vapor.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tino.keitel@tikei.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