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?
next prev parent 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