Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: cbf123@mail.usask.ca, chris.friesen@windriver.com,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "sched/cputime: Fix steal_account_process_tick() to always return jiffies" has been added to the 4.5-stable tree
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2016 11:33:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1460226788255209@kroah.com> (raw)


This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    sched/cputime: Fix steal_account_process_tick() to always return jiffies

to the 4.5-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     sched-cputime-fix-steal_account_process_tick-to-always-return-jiffies.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.5 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From f9c904b7613b8b4c85b10cd6b33ad41b2843fa9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Friesen <cbf123@mail.usask.ca>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 23:18:48 -0600
Subject: sched/cputime: Fix steal_account_process_tick() to always return jiffies

From: Chris Friesen <cbf123@mail.usask.ca>

commit f9c904b7613b8b4c85b10cd6b33ad41b2843fa9d upstream.

The callers of steal_account_process_tick() expect it to return
whether a jiffy should be considered stolen or not.

Currently the return value of steal_account_process_tick() is in
units of cputime, which vary between either jiffies or nsecs
depending on CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN.

If cputime has nsecs granularity and there is a tiny amount of
stolen time (a few nsecs, say) then we will consider the entire
tick stolen and will not account the tick on user/system/idle,
causing /proc/stats to show invalid data.

The fix is to change steal_account_process_tick() to accumulate
the stolen time and only account it once it's worth a jiffy.

(Thanks to Frederic Weisbecker for suggestions to fix a bug in my
first version of the patch.)

Signed-off-by: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/56DBBDB8.40305@mail.usask.ca
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 kernel/sched/cputime.c |   14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
@@ -262,21 +262,21 @@ static __always_inline bool steal_accoun
 #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT
 	if (static_key_false(&paravirt_steal_enabled)) {
 		u64 steal;
-		cputime_t steal_ct;
+		unsigned long steal_jiffies;
 
 		steal = paravirt_steal_clock(smp_processor_id());
 		steal -= this_rq()->prev_steal_time;
 
 		/*
-		 * cputime_t may be less precise than nsecs (eg: if it's
-		 * based on jiffies). Lets cast the result to cputime
+		 * steal is in nsecs but our caller is expecting steal
+		 * time in jiffies. Lets cast the result to jiffies
 		 * granularity and account the rest on the next rounds.
 		 */
-		steal_ct = nsecs_to_cputime(steal);
-		this_rq()->prev_steal_time += cputime_to_nsecs(steal_ct);
+		steal_jiffies = nsecs_to_jiffies(steal);
+		this_rq()->prev_steal_time += jiffies_to_nsecs(steal_jiffies);
 
-		account_steal_time(steal_ct);
-		return steal_ct;
+		account_steal_time(jiffies_to_cputime(steal_jiffies));
+		return steal_jiffies;
 	}
 #endif
 	return false;


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from cbf123@mail.usask.ca are

queue-4.5/sched-cputime-fix-steal_account_process_tick-to-always-return-jiffies.patch

                 reply	other threads:[~2016-04-09 18:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=1460226788255209@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=cbf123@mail.usask.ca \
    --cc=chris.friesen@windriver.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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