linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Rewrite per entity runnable load average tracking

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 2014 10:01:28 +0800
From:	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	bsegall@...gle.com, mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com,
	len.brown@...el.com, alan.cox@...el.com, mark.gross@...el.com,
	pjt@...gle.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Rewrite per entity runnable load average
 tracking

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 08:52:01AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:47:09AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 07:22:07AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 12:08:59PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Since clock_task is the regular clock minus some local amount, the
> > > > difference between two regular clock reads is always a strict upper
> > > > bound on clock_task differences.
> > > > 
> > > This is inspiring. Regarding the clock source in load avg tracking,
> > > should we simply use rq_clock_task instead of cfs_rq_clock_task.
> > 
> > Oh *groan* I forgot about that thing. But no, it obviously doesn't
> > matter for running time, because if you're throttled you're nor running
> > and therefore it all doesn't matter, but it can make a huge difference
> > for blocked time accounting I suppose.
> > 
> > > For the bandwidth control case, just update/increase the last_update_time when
> > > unthrottled by this throttled time, so the time would look like freezed. Am I
> > > understanding right?
> > 
> > Yes, it stops the clock when throttled.
> > 
> > > Not sure how much bandwidth control is used, but even not used, every time
> > > we read cfs_rq_clock_task, will burn useless cycles here.
> > 
> > Yep, nothing much you can do about that.
> > 
> > In any case, it is still the case that a normal clock difference is an
> > upper bound.
> 
> I meant, not for this migrating case. But completely don't use cfs_rq_clock_task
> in the entire load avg tracking (and specially compensate the throttle case). No?
> 
Oh, there seems no way to change every task's last_update_time when unthrottled.

Still, need cfs_rq_clock_task.

Thanks,
Yuyang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/