From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] sched/cputime: Support other fields on kcpustat_field()
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 12:51:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191120115142.GA89662@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191119232218.4206-2-frederic@kernel.org>
* Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> wrote:
> Provide support for user, nice, guest and guest_nice fields through
> kcpustat_field().
>
> Whether we account the delta to a nice or not nice field is decided on
> top of the nice value snapshot taken at the time we call kcpustat_field().
> If the nice value of the task has been changed since the last vtime
> update, we may have inacurrate distribution of the nice VS unnice
> cputime.
>
> However this is considered as a minor issue compared to the proper fix
> that would involve interrupting the target on nice updates, which is
> undesired on nohz_full CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
> Cc: Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/cputime.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> index e0cd20693ef5..b2cf544e2109 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> @@ -912,11 +912,21 @@ void task_cputime(struct task_struct *t, u64 *utime, u64 *stime)
> } while (read_seqcount_retry(&vtime->seqcount, seq));
> }
>
> +static u64 kcpustat_user_vtime(struct vtime *vtime)
> +{
> + if (vtime->state == VTIME_USER)
> + return vtime->utime + vtime_delta(vtime);
> + else if (vtime->state == VTIME_GUEST)
> + return vtime->gtime + vtime_delta(vtime);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int kcpustat_field_vtime(u64 *cpustat,
> - struct vtime *vtime,
> + struct task_struct *tsk,
> enum cpu_usage_stat usage,
> int cpu, u64 *val)
> {
> + struct vtime *vtime = &tsk->vtime;
> unsigned int seq;
> int err;
>
> @@ -946,9 +956,36 @@ static int kcpustat_field_vtime(u64 *cpustat,
>
> *val = cpustat[usage];
>
> - if (vtime->state == VTIME_SYS)
> - *val += vtime->stime + vtime_delta(vtime);
> -
> + /*
> + * Nice VS unnice cputime accounting may be inaccurate if
> + * the nice value has changed since the last vtime update.
> + * But proper fix would involve interrupting target on nice
> + * updates which is a no go on nohz_full.
Well, we actually already interrupt the target in both sys_nice() and
sys_setpriority() etc. syscall variants: we call set_user_nice() which
calls resched_curr() and the task is sent an IPI and runs through a
reschedule.
But ... I do agree that this kind of granularity of nice/non-nice
accounting doesn't really matter in practice: the changing of nice values
is a relatively low frequency operation on most systems.
But nevertheless the comment should probably be updated to reflect this.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-20 11:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-19 23:22 [PATCH 0/6] sched/nohz: Make the rest of kcpustat vtime aware v2 Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 1/6] sched/cputime: Support other fields on kcpustat_field() Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-20 11:51 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2019-11-20 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 2/6] sched/vtime: Bring all-in-one kcpustat accessor for vtime fields Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-20 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-20 15:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 3/6] procfs: Use all-in-one vtime aware kcpustat accessor Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 4/6] cpufreq: Use vtime aware kcpustat accessors for user time Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] leds: Use all-in-one vtime aware kcpustat accessor Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-19 23:22 ` [PATCH 6/6] rackmeter: Use " Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-21 2:44 [PATCH 0/6] sched/nohz: Make the rest of kcpustat vtime aware v3 Frederic Weisbecker
2019-11-21 2:44 ` [PATCH 1/6] sched/cputime: Support other fields on kcpustat_field() Frederic Weisbecker
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=20191120115142.GA89662@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--cc=yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com \
--subject='Re: [PATCH 1/6] sched/cputime: Support other fields on kcpustat_field()' \
/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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).