linux-kernel - Re: [BISECTED] "conservative" cpufreq governor broken

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

Message-Id: <1254893230.30157.28.camel@eenurkka-desktop>
Date:	Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:27:10 +0300
From:	Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@...ia.com>
To:	ext Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [BISECTED] "conservative" cpufreq governor broken

On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 03:22 +0200, ext Steven Noonan wrote:
> >>
> >> Tracers may by themselves add some load into the system.
> >>
> >> If I were you, I'd add something like: (I have only one CPU BTW)
> >>
> >> static ktime_t time_prior_idle;
> >> static int64_t idle_total;
> >>
> >> time_prior_idle = ktime_get();
> >> <idle stuff>
> >> idle_total += ktime_to_ns(ktime_sub(ktime_get(), time_prior_idle));
> >>
> >> and have a sysfs hook (something already present, so you can just cat
> >> it) with a trace:
> >>
> >> printk("Times: %lld, %lld \n", idle_total, ktime_to_ns(ktime_get()));
> >>
> >> Sample output:
> >> 374758812519, 386768249832
> >>
> >> So I have 386768249832 / 386768249832 = 96.9 % time spent in idle in
> >> this case.
> >>
> >> (Right, this should provide somewhat descent info, hopefully ;) )
> >>
> >
> > Well, I tried adding the code to cpu_idle() as suggested, but it never
> > printed anything. Apparently cpu_idle() isn't ever being called here.
> > Even added a 'BUG();' at the beginning of the function and it never
> > hit it. Of course, I'm probably missing something obvious. Is there a
> > separate cpu_idle()-esque function for SMP?
> >
> 
> Oh crap. Perhaps it's more insidious. I reverted the bisected commit
> and it _DID_ hit the line I added. So cpu_idle is never entered with
> the bisected commit. Bizarre.
> 
> - Steven

So you're saying that cpu_idle() is not ever called.. The commit in
question - whether you got it or had it reverted - should, and must not
be a trigger for your system to hit cpu_idle(). What if you took a look
at init/main.c, and added traces before the first call to cpu_idle():

start_kernel() ->
rest_init() ->
cpu_idle()

With the patch not reverted?

So I guess, that an irq may actually start your "system up" (patch
reverted) somehow:

irq_exit() ->
tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick() ->
tick_nohz_start_idle() ->
sched_clock_idle_sleep_event() ?

So it looks that maybe the conservative governor isn't broken after
all ;)


(BTW I guess, with SMP, you may wish to have fix things to work in your
setup
static ktime_t time_prior_idle[2];
static int64_t idle_total[2];
and
time_prior_idle[smp_processor_id()] = ktime_get();
etc, and print out times separately).

- Eero

--
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/