From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Chris Friesen <cbf123@mail.usask.ca>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] steal_account_process_tick() should return jiffies
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 11:27:01 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603051121550.3686@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56DA1339.5030601@mail.usask.ca>
Chris,
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Chris Friesen wrote:
First of all the subject line should contain a subsystem prefix,
i.e. "sched/cputime:"
> The callers of steal_account_process_tick() expect it to return whether
> the last jiffy was stolen or not.
>
> Currently the return value of steal_account_process_tick() is in units
> of cputime, which vary between either jiffies or nsecs depending on
> CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN.
Sure, but what is the actual problem? The return value is boolean and tells
whether there was stolen time accounted or not.
> The fix is to change steal_account_process_tick() to always return
> jiffies. If CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN is not enabled then this
> is a no-op.
What does that fix?
> As far as I can tell this bug has been present since commit dee08a72.
Which bug?
> Signed-off-by: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>
> ---
>
> kernel/sched/cputime.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> index b2ab2ff..e724496 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> @@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ static __always_inline bool steal_account_process_tick(void)
> this_rq()->prev_steal_time += cputime_to_nsecs(steal_ct);
>
> account_steal_time(steal_ct);
> - return steal_ct;
> + return cputime_to_jiffies(steal_ct);
So if steal time is close to a jiffie, then cputime_to_jiffies will return 0
and you account a full jiffie to user/system/whatever.
Without a proper explanation of the problem and the resulting "bug" I really
cannot figure out why we want that change.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-05 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-04 22:59 Chris Friesen
2016-03-05 10:27 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2016-03-05 13:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2016-03-06 4:17 ` Chris Friesen
2016-03-06 5:18 ` [PATCH v2] sched/cputime: " Chris Friesen
2016-03-06 10:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-03-08 12:29 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2016-03-08 13:18 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/cputime: Fix steal_account_process_tick() to always " tip-bot for Chris Friesen
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1603051121550.3686@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=cbf123@mail.usask.ca \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.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®