Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1402756 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-18 09:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-05-18 09:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal time support to full dynticks CPU time accounting Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-05-18 09:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal time support to full dynticks CPU time accounting Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-05-18 09:50 +0200
| From | Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 09:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal time support to full dynticks CPU time accounting |
| Message-ID | <rA3VU-7ii-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 13:34 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
>
> @@ -691,8 +691,11 @@ static cputime_t get_vtime_delta(struct
> task_struct *tsk)
>
> static void __vtime_account_system(struct task_struct *tsk)
> {
> + unsigned long steal_time = steal_account_process_tick();
> cputime_t delta_cpu = get_vtime_delta(tsk);
>
> + delta_cpu = steal_time ? (delta_cpu -
> + jiffies_to_cputime(steal_time)) : delta_cpu;
> account_system_time(tsk, irq_count(), delta_cpu,
> cputime_to_scaled(delta_cpu));
> }
>
Sorry to have to go back on my previous email, but
this is now a NAK
The above code can end up passing a negative number
to account_system_time(), which in turn can cause a
divide by zero in scale_stime()
The code needs to ensure that if all the time that
passed was accounted as steal time (which could be
more jiffies than expected, due to remaining partial
jiffies in steal_account_process_tick), the function
does not call account_system_time().
--
All Rights Reversed.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-18 09:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rA4oW-7vr-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1402756 |
2016-05-18 15:10 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>:
> On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 13:34 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
>>
>> @@ -691,8 +691,11 @@ static cputime_t get_vtime_delta(struct
>> task_struct *tsk)
>>
>> static void __vtime_account_system(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> {
>> + unsigned long steal_time = steal_account_process_tick();
>> cputime_t delta_cpu = get_vtime_delta(tsk);
>>
>> + delta_cpu = steal_time ? (delta_cpu -
>> + jiffies_to_cputime(steal_time)) : delta_cpu;
>> account_system_time(tsk, irq_count(), delta_cpu,
>> cputime_to_scaled(delta_cpu));
>> }
>>
>
> Sorry to have to go back on my previous email, but
> this is now a NAK
>
> The above code can end up passing a negative number
> to account_system_time(), which in turn can cause a
> divide by zero in scale_stime()
>
> The code needs to ensure that if all the time that
> passed was accounted as steal time (which could be
> more jiffies than expected, due to remaining partial
> jiffies in steal_account_process_tick), the function
> does not call account_system_time().
Yeah, I will fix it in next version, thank Rik very much for debugging
with me to figure out the root cause of divide zero.
Regards,
Wanpeng Li
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web