From: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Yu Liao <liaoyu15@huawei.com>,
fweisbec@gmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, liwei391@huawei.com,
adobriyan@gmail.com, mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tick/nohz: fix data races in get_cpu_idle_time_us()
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:53:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230201045302.316-1-hdanton@sina.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87357q228f.ffs@tglx>
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 15:44:00 +0100 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>
> 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. It's an estimate after all. If
> there would be a real reason to ensure monotonicity there then we could
> easily do that in the readout code.
>
> 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").
[...]
>
> P.S.: I hate the spinlock in the idle code path, but I don't have a
> better idea.
Provided the percpu rule is enforced, the random numbers mentioned above
could be erased without another spinlock added.
Hillf
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -640,13 +640,26 @@ static void tick_nohz_update_jiffies(kti
/*
* Updates the per-CPU time idle statistics counters
*/
-static void
-update_ts_time_stats(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t now, u64 *last_update_time)
+static u64 update_ts_time_stats(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t now,
+ int io, u64 *last_update_time)
{
ktime_t delta;
+ if (last_update_time)
+ *last_update_time = ktime_to_us(now);
+
if (ts->idle_active) {
delta = ktime_sub(now, ts->idle_entrytime);
+
+ /* update is only expected on the local CPU */
+ if (cpu != smp_processor_id()) {
+ if (io)
+ delta = ktime_add(ts->iowait_sleeptime, delta);
+ else
+ delta = ktime_add(ts->idle_sleeptime, delta);
+ return ktime_to_us(delta);
+ }
+
if (nr_iowait_cpu(cpu) > 0)
ts->iowait_sleeptime = ktime_add(ts->iowait_sleeptime, delta);
else
@@ -654,14 +667,12 @@ update_ts_time_stats(int cpu, struct tic
ts->idle_entrytime = now;
}
- if (last_update_time)
- *last_update_time = ktime_to_us(now);
-
+ return 0;
}
static void tick_nohz_stop_idle(struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t now)
{
- update_ts_time_stats(smp_processor_id(), ts, now, NULL);
+ update_ts_time_stats(smp_processor_id(), ts, now, 0, NULL);
ts->idle_active = 0;
sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event();
@@ -698,7 +709,9 @@ u64 get_cpu_idle_time_us(int cpu, u64 *l
now = ktime_get();
if (last_update_time) {
- update_ts_time_stats(cpu, ts, now, last_update_time);
+ u64 ret = update_ts_time_stats(cpu, ts, now, 0, last_update_time);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
idle = ts->idle_sleeptime;
} else {
if (ts->idle_active && !nr_iowait_cpu(cpu)) {
@@ -739,7 +752,9 @@ u64 get_cpu_iowait_time_us(int cpu, u64
now = ktime_get();
if (last_update_time) {
- update_ts_time_stats(cpu, ts, now, last_update_time);
+ u64 ret = update_ts_time_stats(cpu, ts, now, 1, last_update_time);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
iowait = ts->iowait_sleeptime;
} else {
if (ts->idle_active && nr_iowait_cpu(cpu) > 0) {
next parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-01 4:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230128020051.2328465-1-liaoyu15@huawei.com>
[not found] ` <87357q228f.ffs@tglx>
2023-02-01 4:53 ` Hillf Danton [this message]
2023-02-01 12:02 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-02-01 14:01 ` Hillf Danton
2023-02-01 14:28 ` 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=20230201045302.316-1-hdanton@sina.com \
--to=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=liaoyu15@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liwei391@huawei.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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