public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Zucheng Zheng <zhengzucheng@huawei.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
	bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, frederic@kernel.org,
	hucool.lihua@huawei.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] sched/cputime: Fix the time backward issue about /proc/stat
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:12:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YzQB8afi2rCPvuC1@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220928033402.181530-1-zhengzucheng@huawei.com>

On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 11:34:02AM +0800, Zucheng Zheng wrote:
> From: Zheng Zucheng <zhengzucheng@huawei.com>
> 
> The cputime of cpuN read from /proc/stat has an issue of cputime descent.
> For example, the phenomenon of cputime descent of user is as followed:
> 
> The value read first is 319, and the value read again is 318. As follows:
> first:
>  cat /proc/stat |  grep cpu1
>  cpu1    319    0    496    41665    0    0    0    0    0    0
> again:
>  cat /proc/stat |  grep cpu1
>  cpu1    318    0    497    41674    0    0    0    0    0    0
> 
> The value read from /proc/stat should be monotonically increasing. Otherwise
> user may get incorrect CPU usage.
> 
> The root cause of this problem is that, in the implementation of
> kcpustat_cpu_fetch_vtime, vtime->utime + delta is added to the stack variable
> cpustat instantaneously. If the task is switched between two times, the value
> added to cpustat for the second time may be smaller than that for the first time.
> 
> 				CPU0						CPU1
> First:
> show_stat()
>  ->kcpustat_cpu_fetch()
>   ->kcpustat_cpu_fetch_vtime()
>    ->cpustat[CPUTIME_USER] = kcpustat_cpu(cpu) + vtime->utime + delta       rq->curr is task A
>                                                                             A switch to B,and A->vtime->utime is less than 1 tick
> Then:
> show_stat()
>  ->kcpustat_cpu_fetch()
>   ->kcpustat_cpu_fetch_vtime()
>    ->cpustat[CPUTIME_USER] = kcpustat_cpu(cpu) + vtime->utime + delta;     rq->curr is task B

You're still not explaining where the time gets lost. And the patch is a
horrible band-aid.

What I think you're saying; after staring at this for a while, is that:

  vtime_task_switch_generic()
    __vtime_account_kernel(prev, vtime)
      vtime_account_{guest,system}(tsk, vtime)
        vtime->*time += get_vtime_delta()
	if (vtime->*time >= TICK_NSEC)
	  account_*_time()
	    account_system_index_time()
	      task_group_account_field()
	        __this_cpu_add(kernel_cpustat.cpustat[index], tmp);        <---- here

is not folding time into kernel_cpustat when the task vtime isn't at
least a tick's worth. And then when we switch to another task, we leak
time.

There's another problem here, vtime_task_switch_generic() should use a
single call to sched_clock() to compute the old vtime_delta and set the
new vtime->starttime, otherwise there's a time hole there as well.

This is all quite the maze and it really wants cleaning up, not be made
worse.

So I think you want to do two things:

 - pull kernel_cpustat updates out of task_group_account_field()
   and put them into vtime_task_switch_generic() to be purely
   vtime->starttime based.

 - make vtime_task_switch_generic() use a single sched_clock() call.

I did not audit all the flavours of cputime; there might be fallout, be
sure to cross compile a lot.

Frederic, you agree?

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-28  8:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-28  3:34 [PATCH -next] sched/cputime: Fix the time backward issue about /proc/stat Zucheng Zheng
2022-09-28  8:12 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-09-28 12:11   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-09-30  2:43     ` zhengzucheng
2022-09-30 12:16       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2022-10-09  2:28         ` zhengzucheng
2022-09-30 12:14 ` [sched/cputime] 131c995687: BUG:spinlock_trylock_failure_on_UP_on_CPU kernel test robot

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=YzQB8afi2rCPvuC1@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=hucool.lihua@huawei.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=zhengzucheng@huawei.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