mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] cputime: remove scaling
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:29:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <11f12774-5353-4380-82d0-e22707e11729@email.android.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130410120228.GC8083@gmail.com>

I have a patch that does scaling by multiply for 64-bit architectures.  I probably should clean it up and send it in.  I need to see if it fixes this problem.

Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

>
>* Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Scaling cputime cause problems, bunch of them was fixed, but still is
>possible 
>> to hit multiplication overflow issue, which make {u,s}time values
>incorrect. 
>> This problem has no good solution in kernel.
>
>Wasn't 128-bit math a solution to the overflow problems? 128-bit math
>isn't nice, 
>but at least for multiplication it's defensible.
>
>> This patch remove scaling code and export raw values of {u,t}ime .
>Procps 
>> programs can use newly introduced sum_exec_runtime to find out
>precisely 
>> calculated process cpu time and scale utime, stime values
>accordingly.
>> 
>> Unfortunately times(2) syscall has no such option.
>> 
>> This change affect kernels compiled without
>CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_*.
>
>So, the concern here is that 'top hiding' code can now hide again. It's
>also that 
>we are not really solving the problem, we are pushing it to user-space
>- which in 
>the best case gets updated to solve the problem in some similar fashion
>- and in 
>the worst case does not get updated or does it in a buggy way.
>
>So while user-space has it a bit easier because it can do floating
>point math, is 
>there really no workable solution to the current kernel side integer
>overflow bug? 
>I really prefer robust kernel side accounting/instrumentation.
>
>Thanks,
>
>	Ingo

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-10 14:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-28 16:53 [RFC 0/4] do not make cputime scaling in kernel Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-03-28 16:53 ` [RFC 1/4] cputime: change parameter of thread_group_cputime_adjusted Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-03-28 16:53 ` [RFC 2/4] procfs: add sum_exec_runtime to /proc/PID/stat Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-03-28 16:53 ` [RFC 3/4] sched,proc: add csum_sched_runtime Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-03-28 16:53 ` [RFC 4/4] cputime: remove scaling Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-04-10 12:02   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-10 14:29     ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-04-11  8:37       ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-04-11 15:19         ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-11  8:36     ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-04-11 15:06       ` 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=11f12774-5353-4380-82d0-e22707e11729@email.android.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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

Powered by JetHome