Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1432353 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 2/5] nohz,cputime: remove VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code

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.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 2/5] nohz,cputime: remove VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 01:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 2/5] nohz,cputime: remove VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-06-28 01:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 2/5] nohz,cputime: remove VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 02:00 +0200

#1432353 — Re: [PATCH 2/5] nohz,cputime: remove VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:25:48PM -0400, riel@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> 
> The CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN irq time tracking code does not
> appear to currently work right.
> 
> On CPUs that are nohz_full, people typically do not assign IRQs.

Right, but they can still fire. At least one tick per second, plus the
pinned timers, etc...

>
> On the housekeeping CPU (when a system is booted up with nohz_full),
> sampling should work ok to determine irq and softirq time use, but
> that only covers the housekeeping CPU itself, not the other
> non-nohz_full CPUs.

Hmm, every non-nohz_full CPUs, including the CPU 0, account the irqtime
the same way: through the tick (and therefore can't account much of it).

So I'm a bit confused by the above statements..

> 
> On CPUs that are nohz_idle (the typical way a distro kernel is
> booted), irq time is not accounted at all while the CPU is idle,
> due to the lack of timer ticks.

But as soon as a timer tick fires in idle or afterward, the pending
irqtime is accounted.

That said I don't see how it explains why we do the below:

> 
> Remove the VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code. The next patch will
> allow NO_HZ_FULL kernels to use the IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING code.

I don't get the reason why we are doing this. Now arguably the irqtime
accounting is probably not working as well as before since we switched to
jiffy clock. But I still see some hard irqs accounted when account_irq_exit()
is lucky enough to observe that jiffies changed since the beginning of
the interrupt.

So it's not entirely broken. I agree that we need to switch it to the
generic irqtime accounting code but breaking the code now to reactivate it
in a subsequent patch is prone to future bisection issues.

Thanks.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1432357

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 2016-06-28 at 01:21 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:25:48PM -0400, riel@redhat.com wrote:
> > 
> > From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > 
> > The CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN irq time tracking code does not
> > appear to currently work right.
> > 
> > On CPUs that are nohz_full, people typically do not assign IRQs.
> Right, but they can still fire. At least one tick per second, plus
> the
> pinned timers, etc...
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On the housekeeping CPU (when a system is booted up with
> > nohz_full),
> > sampling should work ok to determine irq and softirq time use, but
> > that only covers the housekeeping CPU itself, not the other
> > non-nohz_full CPUs.
> Hmm, every non-nohz_full CPUs, including the CPU 0, account the
> irqtime
> the same way: through the tick (and therefore can't account much of
> it).
> 
But it will be subtracted from the user time, rather
than the idle time during which the irqs happened.

Furthermore, we might well have 100 jiffies worth of
irq & softirq time on a CPU, and get just 1 jiffy
of userspace time, on systems acting like routers.

> > 
> > 
> > On CPUs that are nohz_idle (the typical way a distro kernel is
> > booted), irq time is not accounted at all while the CPU is idle,
> > due to the lack of timer ticks.
> But as soon as a timer tick fires in idle or afterward, the pending
> irqtime is accounted.
> 
> That said I don't see how it explains why we do the below:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Remove the VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code. The next patch will
> > allow NO_HZ_FULL kernels to use the IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING code.
> I don't get the reason why we are doing this. Now arguably the
> irqtime
> accounting is probably not working as well as before since we
> switched to
> jiffy clock. But I still see some hard irqs accounted when
> account_irq_exit()
> is lucky enough to observe that jiffies changed since the beginning
> of
> the interrupt.
> 
> So it's not entirely broken. I agree that we need to switch it to the
> generic irqtime accounting code but breaking the code now to
> reactivate it
> in a subsequent patch is prone to future bisection issues.

Want me to merge patches 2 & 3 into one, so we immediately
start using the generic code and do not run into bisect
issues?

-- 
All Rights Reversed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1432360

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 07:31:29PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-06-28 at 01:21 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:25:48PM -0400, riel@redhat.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > > 
> > > The CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN irq time tracking code does not
> > > appear to currently work right.
> > > 
> > > On CPUs that are nohz_full, people typically do not assign IRQs.
> > Right, but they can still fire. At least one tick per second, plus
> > the
> > pinned timers, etc...
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On the housekeeping CPU (when a system is booted up with
> > > nohz_full),
> > > sampling should work ok to determine irq and softirq time use, but
> > > that only covers the housekeeping CPU itself, not the other
> > > non-nohz_full CPUs.
> > Hmm, every non-nohz_full CPUs, including the CPU 0, account the
> > irqtime
> > the same way: through the tick (and therefore can't account much of
> > it).
> > 
> But it will be subtracted from the user time, rather
> than the idle time during which the irqs happened.
> 
> Furthermore, we might well have 100 jiffies worth of
> irq & softirq time on a CPU, and get just 1 jiffy
> of userspace time, on systems acting like routers.

Indeed.

> > > Remove the VTIME_GEN vtime irq time code. The next patch will
> > > allow NO_HZ_FULL kernels to use the IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING code.
> > I don't get the reason why we are doing this. Now arguably the
> > irqtime
> > accounting is probably not working as well as before since we
> > switched to
> > jiffy clock. But I still see some hard irqs accounted when
> > account_irq_exit()
> > is lucky enough to observe that jiffies changed since the beginning
> > of
> > the interrupt.
> > 
> > So it's not entirely broken. I agree that we need to switch it to the
> > generic irqtime accounting code but breaking the code now to
> > reactivate it
> > in a subsequent patch is prone to future bisection issues.
> 
> Want me to merge patches 2 & 3 into one, so we immediately
> start using the generic code and do not run into bisect
> issues?

Yeah that would be better.

Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web