mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] time: Add warnings when overflows or underflows are observed
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 08:37:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150312073739.GA15123@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1426133800-29329-8-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org>


* John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> wrote:

> It was suggested that the underflow/overflow protection
> should probably throw some sort of warning out, rather
> then just silently fixing the issue.
> 
> So this patch adds some warnings here. The flag variables
> used are not protected by locks, but since we can't print
> from the reading functions, just being able to say we
> saw an issue in the update interval is useful enough,
> and can be slightly racy without real consequence.

> + * These simple flag variables are managed
> + * without locks, which is racy, but ok since
> + * we don't really care about being super
> + * precise about how many events were seen,
> + * just that a problem was observed.
> + */
> +static int timekeeping_underflow_seen;
> +static int timekeeping_overflow_seen;
> +
> +/* last_warning is only modified under the timekeeping lock */
> +static long timekeeping_last_warning;
> +
>  static void timekeeping_check_update(struct timekeeper *tk, cycle_t offset)
>  {
>  
> @@ -134,28 +148,62 @@ static void timekeeping_check_update(struct timekeeper *tk, cycle_t offset)
>  					offset, name, max_cycles>>1);
>  		}
>  	}
> +
> +	if (timekeeping_underflow_seen) {
> +		if (jiffies - timekeeping_last_warning > WARNING_FREQ) {
> +			printk_deferred("WARNING: Clocksource %s underflow observed. You should report\n", name);
> +			printk_deferred("         this, consider using a different clocksource.\n");
> +			timekeeping_last_warning = jiffies;
> +		}
> +		timekeeping_underflow_seen = 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (timekeeping_overflow_seen) {
> +		if (jiffies - timekeeping_last_warning > WARNING_FREQ) {
> +			printk_deferred("WARNING: Clocksource %s overflow observed. You should report\n", name);
> +			printk_deferred("         this, consider using a different clocksource.\n");
> +			timekeeping_last_warning = jiffies;
> +		}
> +		timekeeping_overflow_seen = 0;
> +	}
>  }
>  
>  static inline cycle_t timekeeping_get_delta(struct tk_read_base *tkr)
>  {
> -	cycle_t cycle_now, delta;
> +	cycle_t now, last, mask, max, delta;
> +	unsigned int seq;
>  
> -	/* read clocksource */
> -	cycle_now = tkr->read(tkr->clock);
> +	/*
> +	 * Since we're called holding a seqlock, the data may shift
> +	 * under us while we're doing the calculation. This can cause
> +	 * false positives, since we'd note a problem but throw the
> +	 * results away. So nest another seqlock here to atomically
> +	 * grab the points we are checking with.
> +	 */
> +	do {
> +		seq = read_seqcount_begin(&tk_core.seq);
> +		now = tkr->read(tkr->clock);
> +		last = tkr->cycle_last;
> +		mask = tkr->mask;
> +		max = tkr->clock->max_cycles;
> +	} while (read_seqcount_retry(&tk_core.seq, seq));
>  
> -	/* calculate the delta since the last update_wall_time */
> -	delta = clocksource_delta(cycle_now, tkr->cycle_last, tkr->mask);
> +	delta = clocksource_delta(now, last, mask);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Try to catch underflows by checking if we are seeing small
>  	 * mask-relative negative values.
>  	 */
> -	if (unlikely((~delta & tkr->mask) < (tkr->mask >> 3)))
> +	if (unlikely((~delta & mask) < (mask >> 3))) {
> +		timekeeping_underflow_seen = 1;
>  		delta = 0;
> +	}
>  
>  	/* Cap delta value to the max_cycles values to avoid mult overflows */
> -	if (unlikely(delta > tkr->clock->max_cycles))
> +	if (unlikely(delta > max)) {
> +		timekeeping_overflow_seen = 1;
>  		delta = tkr->clock->max_cycles;
> +	}

Please add the flags as new fields in the 'struct tk_read_base' data 
structure in include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h - we don't want to go 
back to the old pattern of adding globals to the timekeeping code, 
even if they are just for debugging!

also, timekeeping_check_update() should pass in 'struct tk_read_base', 
not 'struct timekeeper' - it's really only using the tkr bits and 
doing this change would make it similar to timekeeping_get_delta(). It 
would also shorten:

        cycle_t max_cycles = tk->tkr.clock->max_cycles;
        const char *name = tk->tkr.clock->name;

to the more natural looking:

        cycle_t max_cycles = tkr->clock->max_cycles;
        const char *name = tkr->clock->name;

hm?

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-12  7:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-12  4:16 [PATCH 00/12] Increased clocksource validation and cleanups (v4) John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 01/12] clocksource: Simplify clocks_calc_max_nsecs logic John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:01   ` [tip:timers/core] clocksource: Simplify the clocks_calc_max_nsecs () logic tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 02/12] clocksource: Simplify logic around clocksource wrapping safety margins John Stultz
2015-03-12  5:55   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-13  9:01   ` [tip:timers/core] clocksource: Simplify the " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 03/12] clocksource: Add max_cycles to clocksource structure John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:01   ` [tip:timers/core] clocksource: Add 'max_cycles' to ' struct clocksource' tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 04/12] time: Add debugging checks to warn if we see delays John Stultz
2015-03-12  6:32   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-13  9:02   ` [tip:timers/core] timekeeping: " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 05/12] time: Add infrastructure to cap clocksource reads to the max_cycles value John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:02   ` [tip:timers/core] timekeeping: Add checks to cap clocksource reads to the 'max_cycles' value tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 06/12] time: Try to catch clocksource delta underflows John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:02   ` [tip:timers/core] timekeeping: " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 07/12] time: Add warnings when overflows or underflows are observed John Stultz
2015-03-12  7:37   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-03-13  9:03   ` [tip:timers/core] timekeeping: " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 08/12] clocksource: Improve clocksource watchdog reporting John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:03   ` [tip:timers/core] " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 09/12] clocksource: Mostly kill clocksource_register() John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:03   ` [tip:timers/core] " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 10/12] sparc: Convert to using clocksource_register_hz() John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:04   ` [tip:timers/core] clocksource, sparc32: " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 11/12] clocksource: Add some debug info about clocksources being registered John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:04   ` [tip:timers/core] " tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  4:16 ` [PATCH 12/12] clocksource: Rename __clocksource_updatefreq_* to __clocksource_update_freq_* John Stultz
2015-03-13  9:04   ` [tip:timers/core] clocksource: Rename __clocksource_updatefreq_*( ) to __clocksource_update_freq_*() tip-bot for John Stultz
2015-03-12  9:19 ` [PATCH 00/12] Increased clocksource validation and cleanups (v4) Ingo Molnar
2015-03-12 16:26   ` John Stultz
2015-03-13  8:58     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-13 17:54       ` John Stultz
2015-03-16  8:28         ` Ingo Molnar

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=20150312073739.GA15123@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=prarit@redhat.com \
    --cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --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