From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>
To: Wei Gao <wegao@suse.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: 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 15:14:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48eb633d-9fbe-4299-8d10-e7686acf5a3f@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261014015258.13967-1-wegao@suse.com>
On 10/14/26 02:52, 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.
So reading the test, the reason this doesn't fail constantly (on a non-isolated
machine) is the massive margins?
It pins the io_uring_wait_cqe_timeout() to CPU0 with either in_iowait=1 or
in_iowait=0.
It then asserts after 1s that CPU0 got:
a) for in_iowait=0 at most +10 iowait units (<10% CPU time)
b) for in_iowait=1 at least +50 iowait units (>50% CPU time)
So a) would fail on too many unrelated iowaits, b) would fail on unrelated
runnable tasks.
I don't think validating the per-task in_iowait setting via the CPU aggregate
is really feasible FWIW.
>
> 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.
>
> Fixes: 7198e3927a14 ("sched/cputime: Handle idle irqtime gracefully")
> Signed-off-by: Wei Gao <wegao@suse.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/cputime.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> index 06bddaa738e5..e8b56433c61c 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> @@ -496,7 +496,8 @@ void kcpustat_irq_enter(u64 now)
> struct kernel_cpustat *kc = kcpustat_this_cpu;
>
> if (!vtime_generic_enabled_this_cpu() &&
> - (irqtime_enabled() || vtime_accounting_enabled_this_cpu()))
> + (irqtime_enabled() || vtime_accounting_enabled_this_cpu() ||
> + nr_iowait_cpu(smp_processor_id()) > 0))
> kcpustat_idle_stop(kc, now);
> }
>
> @@ -510,9 +511,13 @@ void kcpustat_irq_exit(u64 now)
> * need to pause nohz accounting. Resume nohz accounting as long
> * as the irqtime config is enabled to handle case where irqtime
> * accounting got runtime disabled in the middle of an IRQ.
> + *
> + * Also resume accounting if it was paused on IRQ enter due to
> + * iowait.
> */
> if (!vtime_generic_enabled_this_cpu() &&
> - (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING) || vtime_accounting_enabled_this_cpu()))
> + (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING) || vtime_accounting_enabled_this_cpu() ||
> + !kc->idle_elapse))
> kcpustat_idle_start(kc, now);
> }
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-14 14:14 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
2026-10-14 14:14 ` Christian Loehle [this message]
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=48eb633d-9fbe-4299-8d10-e7686acf5a3f@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®