public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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>

  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