From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932596AbcHIXHW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 9 Aug 2016 19:07:22 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:36370 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932521AbcHIXHV (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 9 Aug 2016 19:07:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1470751579.13905.77.camel@redhat.com>
References: <1468421405-20056-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>
 <1468421405-20056-2-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <CANRm+CyYHLaihuk+ckQg42-Lo_3vFHaS8gU=GmXh8Rfq5mMpaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1470751579.13905.77.camel@redhat.com>
From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:07:19 +0800
Message-ID: <CANRm+Cx6LUY2Jzh4uCeNfLTEXCAeWqGw55E0qiwMCZ19fUGV4A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] sched,time: Count actually elapsed irq & softirq time
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

2016-08-09 22:06 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>:
> On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 11:59 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> Hi Rik,
>> 2016-07-13 22:50 GMT+08:00 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>:
>> > From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
>> >
>> > Currently, if there was any irq or softirq time during 'ticks'
>> > jiffies, the entire period will be accounted as irq or softirq
>> > time.
>> >
>> > This is inaccurate if only a subset of the time was actually spent
>> > handling irqs, and could conceivably mis-count all of the ticks
>> > during
>> > a period as irq time, when there was some irq and some softirq
>> > time.
>> >
>> > This can actually happen when irqtime_account_process_tick is
>> > called
>> > from account_idle_ticks, which can pass a larger number of ticks
>> > down
>> > all at once.
>> >
>> > Fix this by changing irqtime_account_hi_update,
>> > irqtime_account_si_update,
>> > and steal_account_process_ticks to work with cputime_t time units,
>> > and
>> > return the amount of time spent in each mode.
>>
>> Do we need to minus st cputime from idle cputime in
>> account_idle_ticks() when noirqtime is true? I try to add this logic
>> w/ noirqtime and idle=poll boot parameter for a full dynticks guest,
>> however, there is no difference, where I miss?
>
> Yes, you are right. The code in account_idle_ticks()
> could use the same treatment.
>
> I am not sure why it would not work, though...

I will try nohz idle kvm guest and other more tests, a patch will be
sent out once successful.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li