linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING, finer accounting of CPU irq time

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: <1284897666.2275.638.camel@laptop>
Date:	Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:01:06 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Add IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING, finer accounting of CPU
 irq time

On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 13:21 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 18:56 -0700, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> > +void account_system_vtime(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > +{
> > +       unsigned long flags;
> > +       int cpu;
> > +       u64 now, delta;
> > +
> > +       if (!sched_clock_irqtime)
> > +               return;
> > +
> > +       local_irq_save(flags);
> > +
> > +       cpu = task_cpu(tsk);
> > +       now = sched_clock();
> > +       delta = now - per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu);
> > +       per_cpu(irq_start_time, cpu) = now;
> > +       if (hardirq_count())
> > +               per_cpu(cpu_hardirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> > +       else if (softirq_count())
> > +               per_cpu(cpu_softirq_time, cpu) += delta;
> > +
> > +       local_irq_restore(flags);
> > +} 
> 
> This seems to suggest you count time double if a hardirq hits while
> we're doing softirqs, but being as this is an incomplete api its very
> hard to tell indeed.

OK, so by virtue of calling the same function on _enter and _exit its
not incomplete, just weird.

And it won't account time double, since it uses irq_start_time to
compute deltas between invocations and will attribute that delta to only
one state.

You still do have the problem with local_bh_disable() though, since you
cannot distinguish between having bh disabled and processing softirq.

So a hardirq that hits while you have bh disabled will inflate your
softirq time.

A possible solution is to have local_bh_{disable,enable} {add,sub}
2*SOFTIRQ_OFFSET and have the processing use SOFTIRQ_OFFSET, will need a
bit of a code shuffle though.
--
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/