From: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/cpuacct: Fix charge cpuacct.usage_sys incorrently.
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 18:43:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YD55OxQrJ54PWgs+@blackbook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200420070453.76815-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2072 bytes --]
Hello.
(Sorry for necroposting, found this upstream reference only now.)
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 03:04:53PM +0800, Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
> /* Time spent by the tasks of the CPU accounting group executing in ... */
> @@ -339,7 +340,7 @@ void cpuacct_charge(struct task_struct *tsk, u64 cputime)
> {
> struct cpuacct *ca;
> int index = CPUACCT_STAT_SYSTEM;
> - struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(tsk);
> + struct pt_regs *regs = get_irq_regs() ? : task_pt_regs(tsk);
I've read the discussion in [1] but I don't think this approach is
correct either (and I don't know what is better :-/).
I only have a qualitative proof:
host:~ # uname -r
5.10.16-1-default
host:~ # systemd-run -p CPUAccounting=yes sh -c 'time sh -c "i=0 ; while [ \"\$i\" -lt 10000 ] ; do i=\$((\$i+1)) ; cat /proc/slabinfo >/dev/null ; done" ; sleep inf'
Running as unit: run-r101b9f53efcb4d2a9bfb65feb6f120ca.service
host:~ # cat /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuacct/system.slice/run-r101b9f53efcb4d2a9bfb65feb6f120ca.service/cpuacct.usage{,_user,_sys}
16138535165
14332580468
1805954697
(See that sys/user ~ 0.1)
host:~ # journalctl -u run-r101b9f53efcb4d2a9bfb65feb6f120ca.service
-- Logs begin at Tue 2021-03-02 18:06:41 CET, end at Tue 2021-03-02 18:27:45 CET. --
Mar 02 18:27:29 host systemd[1]: Started /usr/bin/sh -c time sh -c "i=0 ; while [ \"\$i\" -lt 10000 ] ; do i=\$((\$i+1)) ; cat /proc/slabinfo >/dev/null ; done" ; sleep inf.
Mar 02 18:27:45 host sh[19117]: real 0m15.543s
Mar 02 18:27:45 host sh[19117]: user 0m10.752s
Mar 02 18:27:45 host sh[19117]: sys 0m5.379s
(See that sys/user ~ 0.5)
host:~ # cat /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuacct/system.slice/run-r101b9f53efcb4d2a9bfb65feb6f120ca.service/cpuacct.stat
user 415
system 1209
(See that sys/user ~ 3.0 :-o)
The expectation is that significant amount of the loop is spent in
kernel (dumping slabinfo). I can't tell which of the ratios fits the
reality best but the cpuacct.usage_sys still seems too low.
Michal
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200416141833.50663-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com/
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-02 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-20 7:04 Muchun Song
2020-05-19 18:44 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/cpuacct: Fix charge cpuacct.usage_sys tip-bot2 for Muchun Song
2021-03-02 17:43 ` Michal Koutný [this message]
2021-03-03 3:39 ` [External] Re: [PATCH v2] sched/cpuacct: Fix charge cpuacct.usage_sys incorrently Muchun Song
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=YD55OxQrJ54PWgs+@blackbook \
--to=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®