mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@oracle.com>
To: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	dario.faggioli@citrix.com, bevan@bi-co.net, xen.list@daevel.fr,
	joao.m.martins@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched/cputime: do not decrease steal time after live migration on xen
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:29:08 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <073e34c7-3320-c21a-a1a3-467728b87f3f@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171010124201.GD8263@redhat.com>

Hi Stanislaw and Peter,

On 10/10/2017 08:42 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:59:26PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> (Cc:-ed more gents involved in kernel/sched/cputime.c work. Full patch quoted 
>> below.)
>>
>> * Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> After guest live migration on xen, steal time in /proc/stat
>>> (cpustat[CPUTIME_STEAL]) might decrease because steal returned by
>>> paravirt_steal_clock() might be less than this_rq()->prev_steal_time.
>>>
>>> For instance, steal time of each vcpu is 335 before live migration.
>>>
>>> cpu  198 0 368 200064 1962 0 0 1340 0 0
>>> cpu0 38 0 81 50063 492 0 0 335 0 0
>>> cpu1 65 0 97 49763 634 0 0 335 0 0
>>> cpu2 38 0 81 50098 462 0 0 335 0 0
>>> cpu3 56 0 107 50138 374 0 0 335 0 0
>>>
>>> After live migration, steal time is reduced to 312.
>>>
>>> cpu  200 0 370 200330 1971 0 0 1248 0 0
>>> cpu0 38 0 82 50123 500 0 0 312 0 0
>>> cpu1 65 0 97 49832 634 0 0 312 0 0
>>> cpu2 39 0 82 50167 462 0 0 312 0 0
>>> cpu3 56 0 107 50207 374 0 0 312 0 0
>>>
>>> The code in this patch is borrowed from do_stolen_accounting() which has
>>> already been removed from linux source code since commit ecb23dc6 ("xen:
>>> add steal_clock support on x86").
>>>
>>> Similar and more severe issue would impact prior linux 4.8-4.10 as
>>> discussed by Michael Las at
>>> https://0xstubs.org/debugging-a-flaky-cpu-steal-time-counter-on-a-paravirtualized-xen-guest.
>>> Unlike the issue discussed by Michael Las which would overflow steal time
>>> and lead to 100% st usage in top command for linux 4.8-4.10, the issue for
>>> linux 4.11+ would only decrease but not overflow steal time after live
>>> migration.
>>>
>>> References: https://0xstubs.org/debugging-a-flaky-cpu-steal-time-counter-on-a-paravirtualized-xen-guest
>>> Signed-off-by: Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>>  kernel/sched/cputime.c | 13 ++++++++++---
>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
>>> index 14d2dbf..57d09cab 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
>>> @@ -238,10 +238,17 @@ static __always_inline u64 steal_account_process_time(u64 maxtime)
>>>  {
>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT
>>>  	if (static_key_false(&paravirt_steal_enabled)) {
>>> -		u64 steal;
>>> +		u64 steal, steal_time;
>>> +		s64 steal_delta;
>>> +
>>> +		steal_time = paravirt_steal_clock(smp_processor_id());
>>> +		steal = steal_delta = steal_time - this_rq()->prev_steal_time;
>>> +
>>> +		if (unlikely(steal_delta < 0)) {
>>> +			this_rq()->prev_steal_time = steal_time;
> 
> I don't think setting prev_steal_time to smaller value is right
> thing to do.

If we do not set prev_steal_time to smaller steal (obtained from
paravirt_steal_clock()), it will take a while for kernel to wait for new steal
to catch up with this_rq()->prev_steal_time, and cpustat[CPUTIME_STEAL] will
stay unchanged until steal is more than this_rq()->prev_steal_time again. Do you
think it is fine?

If it is fine, I will try to limit the fix to xen specific code in
driver/xen/time.c so that we would not taint kernel/sched/cputime.c, as Peter
has asked why not just fix up paravirt_steal_time() on migration.

Thank you very much!

Dongli Zhang

> 
> Beside, I don't think we need to check for overflow condition for
> cputime variables (it will happen after 279 years :-). So instead
> of introducing signed steal_delta variable I would just add
> below check, which should be sufficient to fix the problem:
> 
> 	if (unlikely(steal <= this_rq()->prev_steal_time))
> 		return 0;
> 
> Thanks
> Stanislaw
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-10-11  7:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-10  9:14 Dongli Zhang
2017-10-10 10:07 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2017-10-10 10:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-10-10 12:42   ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2017-10-10 12:48     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-10-10 14:01       ` Rik van Riel
2017-10-11  7:47         ` Dongli Zhang
2017-10-11  7:29     ` Dongli Zhang [this message]
2017-10-10 11:58 ` Peter Zijlstra

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=073e34c7-3320-c21a-a1a3-467728b87f3f@oracle.com \
    --to=dongli.zhang@oracle.com \
    --cc=bevan@bi-co.net \
    --cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
    --cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
    --cc=xen.list@daevel.fr \
    --cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.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®