From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Wei Gao <wegao@suse.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] sched/cputime: Preserve iowait accounting across waking interrupts in dyntick-idle
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 14:17:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <002a3200-81ae-43b3-860f-64135c28438c@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261014124934.GE4121339@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 10/14/26 13:49, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 01:52:58AM +0000, Wei Gao wrote:
>> In liburing's test suite, the test/iowait.t test case intermittently fails
>> with:
>> iowait diff too small: 48
>> test 1 failed
>> on tickless systems where IRQ time accounting (CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING)
>> is not enabled.
>>
>> Commit 7198e3927a14 ("sched/cputime: Handle idle irqtime gracefully")
>> optimized dyntick-idle cputime accounting by avoiding pausing idle
>> accounting on IRQ entry when IRQ time accounting is disabled.
>>
>> However, this causes iowait time to be erroneously accounted as
>> CPUTIME_IDLE if the task waiting for I/O is woken up inside the interrupt
>> handler (such as the 1-second timeout hrtimer in liburing's test/iowait.t):
>>
>> 1. In test/iowait.t, a read request is submitted on an empty pipe and
>> io_uring_wait_cqe_timeout() is called with a 1-second timeout. Because
>> current->in_iowait is set, rq->nr_iowait on the CPU is incremented
>> to 1. When the CPU enters tickless idle, the periodic scheduler tick
>> is stopped.
>> 2. When the 1-second timeout expires, the hrtimer interrupt fires.
>> Because irqtime is disabled, kcpustat_irq_enter() does not pause idle
>> accounting.
>> 3. Inside the interrupt handler, io_cqring_timer_wakeup() calls
>> wake_up_process(). In ttwu_do_activate(), waking up the task immediately
>> decrements rq->nr_iowait from 1 to 0 before the CPU has exited idle.
>> 4. When the CPU returns from the interrupt and calls tick_nohz_idle_exit()
>> -> kcpustat_idle_stop() to settle the elapsed tickless idle duration,
>> it checks:
>> iowait = nr_iowait_cpu(smp_processor_id()) > 0;
>> Because rq->nr_iowait was already decremented by ttwu_do_activate(),
>> this evaluates to false. As a result, the entire 1-second idle duration
>> spent waiting for I/O is credited to CPUTIME_IDLE instead of
>> CPUTIME_IOWAIT, causing diff < 50 and failing the test.
>>
>> Fix this by checking nr_iowait_cpu() in kcpustat_irq_enter(). If the CPU is
>> currently in iowait, pause and settle the elapsed time to CPUTIME_IOWAIT
>> before the interrupt handler runs. On kcpustat_irq_exit(), resume
>> accounting if it was paused.
>
> Using nr_iowait_cpu() is fundamentally never a fix. It is rolling a dice
> and liking random numbers. See the comment that goes with that function.
>
Speaking of, that comment is stale, menu doesn't use that heuristic anymore.
FWIW the remaining aggregated nr_iowait users seem to be accounting/reporting.
(cpufreq still uses it, but it comes directly from p->in_iowait).
Given they are exported (/proc/stat procs_blocked and something in s390) I don't
see how we can remove this entirely but at least nr_iowait_cpu() as opposed
to cpu_has_iowait() could be refactored. The issues are obviously the same still.
I'll send a patch.
Peter, if you see a path to ever retire iowait (or at least the CPU iowait for now),
I'm more than happy to sink some time into it...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-14 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-14 1:52 Wei Gao
2026-10-14 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-14 13:17 ` Christian Loehle [this message]
2026-10-14 14:14 ` Christian Loehle
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=002a3200-81ae-43b3-860f-64135c28438c@arm.com \
--to=christian.loehle@arm.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wegao@suse.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®