mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
	andi.kleen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: don't run watchdog forever
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:34:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210325083411.GA77653@shbuild999.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <875z286xtk.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>

Hi Thomas,

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 04:50:31PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02 2021 at 20:06, Feng Tang wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:16:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:54:24AM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> >> > clocksource watchdog runs every 500ms, which creates some OS noise.
> >> > As the clocksource wreckage (especially for those that has per-cpu
> >> > reading hook) usually happens shortly after CPU is brought up or
> >> > after system resumes from sleep state, so add a time limit for
> >> > clocksource watchdog to only run for a period of time, and make
> >> > sure it run at least twice for each CPU.
> >> > 
> >> > Regarding performance data, there is no improvement data with the
> >> > micro-benchmarks we have like hackbench/netperf/fio/will-it-scale
> >> > etc. But it obviously reduces periodic timer interrupts, and may
> >> > help in following cases:
> >> > * When some CPUs are isolated to only run scientific or high
> >> >   performance computing tasks on a NOHZ_FULL kernel, where there
> >> >   is almost no interrupts, this could make it more quiet
> >> > * On a cluster which runs a lot of systems in parallel with
> >> >   barriers there are always enough systems which run the watchdog
> >> >   and make everyone else wait
> >> > 
> >> > Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
> >> 
> >> Urgh.. so this hopes and prays that the TSC wrackage happens in the
> >> first 10 minutes after boot.
> 
> which is wishful thinking....
> 
> > Yes, the 10 minutes part is only based on our past experience and we
> > can make it longer. But if there was real case that the wrackage happened
> > long after CPU is brought up like days, then this patch won't help
> > much.
> 
> It really depends on the BIOS wreckage. On one of my machine it takes up
> to a day depending on the workload.
> 
> Anything pre TSC_ADJUST wants the watchdog on. With TSC ADJUST available
> we can probably avoid it.
> 
> There is a caveat though. If the machine never goes idle then TSC adjust
> is not able to detect a potential wreckage. OTOH, most of the broken
> BIOSes tweak TSC only by a few cycles and that is usually detectable
> during boot. So we might be clever about it and schedule a check every
> hour when during the first 10 minutes a modification of TSC adjust is
> seen on any CPU.

I've thought about implementing this (sorry for delay), and would
clarify something to understand it correctly. This hourly check is only
for x86's tsc_adjust overriden by BIOS, and not the general kernel watchdog?
As the current clocksources have different wrap time, like acpi_pm timer
will wrap around every 4 seconds, and hpet wraps about every 300 scconds,
we can only either keep doing the watchdog check or cancel it.

If so, we can start a timer fired 10 minutes later to check it, and extend
the timer to 1 hour if there is no tsc_adjust overridden.

I've checked one open-sourced BIOS code project: EDK2 (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2),
where I did some grep and can't find places writting to tsc_adjust msr,
which can give us more confidence that fewer and fewer BIOS will wrongly
write to tsc_adjust msr :)

Thanks,
Feng

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-03-25  8:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-02  2:54 Feng Tang
2021-03-02  9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-02 12:06   ` Feng Tang
2021-03-03 15:50     ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-04  7:43       ` Feng Tang
2021-03-04 14:15         ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-05  2:30           ` Feng Tang
2021-03-25  8:34       ` Feng Tang [this message]
2021-03-25 11:40         ` Thomas Gleixner

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=20210325083411.GA77653@shbuild999.sh.intel.com \
    --to=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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®