From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA742C38142 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231622AbjAaSgL (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 13:36:11 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60894 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231707AbjAaSf5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 13:35:57 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x630.google.com (mail-ej1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F506589A3 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:35:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x630.google.com with SMTP id me3so44341078ejb.7 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:35:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GDZNm68+DW/7pAZG7jeGIqRco2qgZ0ITF84Ol7Jrl8E=; b=DrvvaAVfOE04PLUM6A4bv+3R6HxAcAr5OFRselyMP94iAKD+SpjTDTdr2Fb8k8YL3v JUMlQhlmJ4igGuwMFx92qAHMGk5CUVEShy3BUdVEJFjL7VCQ5ybAz/EeSARYYlriIS6e QYftzFWMz422Iu7U+STZQAG290hm2TGTx3ABDkrGqjSfO6swJgiHiM2ODtsTVE2oiyzD WewtVRb35VjSKrppPrAootRF2Aw637IuqSkWnHCuLlvr2U2/nqHs8OEJ9YBfk6nO2el2 NW9SnwGQiIFqOiyN03hHn1Nv+rE333ajAu+z5D9rSV6XIgwVbEU0ADitCMy5QgBMXbhI X1Ew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=GDZNm68+DW/7pAZG7jeGIqRco2qgZ0ITF84Ol7Jrl8E=; b=3eeYjIH57hA0Eyc431JhBMQuATai95nAec1r3v4evIaKqjJDgYLzJYqPiVHETfq7JK umM4H1CdDR5TFv+sjID1BSLuM6I9Y344+8ZuM81CoPBRNKQBJn0JUlKwxLnomrMASDvD N24ax7ZJjAZL6X/Q+TTdBW+HufyFcWOJWdIuv2d1nwVI1xg+KIhEs7O3a3IWPUE3quZX GL21ylBHciK8h3lut21ltOChaloPCIujR/urDJ4k6bVTT1dFfr8jq8tPSGaQEOF008s4 Z+HMcBb5nAWMFwzbPX5I3MX1Cll+fFPZIY835/1krlqeUyv1QjPI2PoBf6xqxlnrK4s8 Rc/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUdEgaIt2WL0DOEZvqR2oHWR+ZSJbwMz792RQeQM5y8Z8aU/zmz sG/1++P9hiy7QRxnNYaGTvhMwWjz/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+mjz3gD6zwXYqQ1d6gKCNsglLpjNHFPf6jBP9/tjCXVhHe49j4Qe/PWrrwyK/Ue5b1SwKUiA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:97d4:b0:886:703a:4dee with SMTP id js20-20020a17090797d400b00886703a4deemr13594361ejc.57.1675190142414; Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:35:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from p183 ([46.53.253.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b8-20020a170906708800b0088550a1ce6esm4981554ejk.222.2023.01.31.10.35.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:35:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 21:35:39 +0300 From: Alexey Dobriyan To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Yu Liao , fweisbec@gmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, liwei391@huawei.com, mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tick/nohz: fix data races in get_cpu_idle_time_us() Message-ID: References: <20230128020051.2328465-1-liaoyu15@huawei.com> <87357q228f.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87357q228f.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 03:44:00PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, Jan 28 2023 at 10:00, Yu Liao wrote: > > selftest/proc/proc-uptime-001 complains: > > Euler:/mnt # while true; do ./proc-uptime-001; done > > proc-uptime-001: proc-uptime-001.c:41: main: Assertion `i1 >= i0' failed. > > proc-uptime-001: proc-uptime-001.c:41: main: Assertion `i1 >= i0' failed. > > > > /proc/uptime should be monotonically increasing. This occurs because > > the data races between get_cpu_idle_time_us and > > tick_nohz_stop_idle/tick_nohz_start_idle, for example: > > > > CPU0 CPU1 > > get_cpu_idle_time_us > > > > tick_nohz_idle_exit > > now = ktime_get(); > > tick_nohz_stop_idle > > update_ts_time_stats > > delta = ktime_sub(now, ts->idle_entrytime); > > ts->idle_sleeptime = ktime_add(ts->idle_sleeptime, delta) > > ts->idle_entrytime = now > > > > now = ktime_get(); > > if (ts->idle_active && !nr_iowait_cpu(cpu)) { > > ktime_t delta = ktime_sub(now, ts->idle_entrytime); > > idle = ktime_add(ts->idle_sleeptime, delta); > > //idle is slightly greater than the actual value > > } else { > > idle = ts->idle_sleeptime; > > } > > ts->idle_active = 0 > > > > After this, idle = idle_sleeptime(actual idle value) + now(CPU0) - now(CPU1). > > If get_cpu_idle_time_us() is called immediately after ts->idle_active = 0, > > only ts->idle_sleeptime is returned, which is smaller than the previously > > read one, resulting in a non-monotonically increasing idle time. In > > addition, there are other data race scenarios not listed here. > > Seriously this procfs accuracy is the least of the problems and if this > would be the only issue then we could trivially fix it by declaring that > the procfs output might go backwards. Declarations on l-k are meaningless. > If there would be a real reason to ensure monotonicity there then we could > easily do that in the readout code. People expect it to be monotonic. I wrote this test fully expecting that /proc/uptime is monotonic. It didn't ever occured to me that idletime can go backwards (nor uptime, but uptime is not buggy). > But the real issue is that both get_cpu_idle_time_us() and > get_cpu_iowait_time_us() can invoke update_ts_time_stats() which is way > worse than the above procfs idle time going backwards. > > If update_ts_time_stats() is invoked concurrently for the same CPU then > ts->idle_sleeptime and ts->iowait_sleeptime are turning into random > numbers. > > This has been broken 12 years ago in commit 595aac488b54 ("sched: > Introduce a function to update the idle statistics").