From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Stian Halseth <stian@itx.no>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: Don't warn when the tick period starts after idle exit
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2026 14:54:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <auXzIbzU9aWBD_fM@pavilion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <68f0450d47577dc4f83d32e5b0211c97ee8d24bd.camel@itx.no>
Le Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 06:37:22PM +0100, Stian Halseth a écrit :
> Hi Frederic,
>
> On Wed, 2026-10-28 at 15:14 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > So let me depict that:
> >
> > // clocksource = jiffies ?
> > // clockevent = lapic ?
> > tick_setup_device()
> > tick_next_period = ktime_get() // jiffies_to_nsecs(jiffies)
> >
> > tick_periodic()
> > tick_next_period += TICK_NSECS
> > jiffies++ // ktime_get() == tick_next_period
> >
> > // jiffies > tsc_early
> > clocksource_select()
> >
> > tick_periodic()
> > //one tick has passed, so ktime_get() == jiffies + 1
>
> Here is where it goes wrong. One tick has passed in real time, but not
> in ktime. The switch happened d after the last tick, jiffies never
> counted that d, and the tsc only counts from the switch on, so here
> ktime_get() == jiffies + TICK_NSEC - d.
So that assume that during the clocksource switch, the new clock synchronize
with the old one so that ktime_get() from the new clock should start from the
last value of the old clock. I'm having troubles to verify if
tk_setup_internals() does exactly that. Trying to recollect the few pieces of
my brain lost in the process.
I just added this patch to see what happens in practice:
diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index ea2e6e55f37b..e8f3fc435933 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -1854,6 +1854,7 @@ static int change_clocksource(void *data)
{
struct clocksource *new = data, *old = NULL;
+ printk("old= %lld\n", ktime_get());
/*
* If the clocksource is in a module, get a module reference.
* Succeeds for built-in code (owner == NULL) as well. Abort if the
@@ -1876,7 +1877,7 @@ static int change_clocksource(void *data)
tk_setup_internals(tks, new);
timekeeping_update_from_shadow(&tk_core, TK_UPDATE_ALL);
}
-
+ printk("new= %lld\n", ktime_get());
tk_aux_update_clocksource();
if (old) {
And I get this dump when jiffies switched to tsc_early:
[ 1.549194] old= 1352575566
[ 1.549930] new= 1352578748
[ 1.550636] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc-early
That's 3 us, it could be the simple difference between the 2 printk.
But the switch from tsc-early to tsc is much more:
[ 2.639818] old= 2445754540
[ 2.640172] new= 2446107950
[ 2.640927] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc
That's 353 us.
What do you think?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-31 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-07 14:29 [PATCH v3] sched/cputime: Don't account idle time twice after dyntick-idle Stian Halseth
2026-10-14 12:17 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-10-16 8:01 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Stian Halseth
2026-10-25 7:27 ` WARNING: kernel/sched/cputime.c:481 at kcpustat_dyntick_stop+0x8b/0xa0, CPU#0: swapper/0/0 (was: [PATCH v3] sched/cputime: Don't account idle time twice after dyntick-idle) Paul Menzel
2026-10-25 8:13 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-25 10:02 ` [PATCH] sched/cputime: Don't warn when the tick period starts after idle exit Stian Halseth
2026-10-26 16:42 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-10-26 17:28 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-27 17:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-10-27 19:05 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-28 14:14 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-10-28 17:37 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-31 13:54 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2026-10-31 14:11 ` Stian Halseth
2026-10-30 16:14 ` Breno Leitao
2026-10-30 20:48 ` Stian Halseth
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=auXzIbzU9aWBD_fM@pavilion.home \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stian@itx.no \
--cc=tglx@kernel.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®