| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1287614941-32325-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:48:56 -0700 From: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 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> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@...ium.com>, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>, Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com> Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Proper kernel irq time reporting -v0 This is part 2 of "Proper kernel irq time accounting -v4" http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail//linux/kernel/1010.0/01175.html and applies over those changes. Part 1 solves the way irqs are accounted in scheduler and tasks. This patchset solves how irq times are reported in /proc/stat and also not to include irq time in task->stime, etc. Example: Running a cpu intensive loop and network intensive nc on a 4 CPU system and looking at 'top' output. With vanilla kernel: Cpu0 : 0.0% us, 0.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 99.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si Cpu1 : 100.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu2 : 1.3% us, 27.2% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 71.4% si Cpu3 : 1.6% us, 1.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 96.7% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 7555 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 100 0.0 0:15.79 nc 7563 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 100 0.0 0:13.13 loop Notes: - Both tasks show 100% CPU, even when one of them is stuck on a CPU thats processing 70% softirq. - no hardirq time. With "part 1" patches: Cpu0 : 0.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 100.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu1 : 100.0% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si Cpu2 : 2.0% us, 30.6% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 67.4% si Cpu3 : 0.7% us, 0.7% sy, 0.3% ni, 98.3% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 6289 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 100 0.0 2:18.67 loop 5737 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 33 0.0 0:26.72 nc Notes: - Tasks show 100% CPU and 33% CPU that correspond to their non-irq exec time. - no hardirq time. With "part 1 + part 2" patches: Cpu0 : 1.3% us, 1.0% sy, 0.3% ni, 97.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si Cpu1 : 99.3% us, 0.0% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.7% hi, 0.0% si Cpu2 : 1.3% us, 31.5% sy, 0.0% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 8.3% hi, 58.9% si Cpu3 : 1.0% us, 2.0% sy, 0.3% ni, 95.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.7% hi, 1.0% si PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 20929 root 20 0 3632 268 204 R 99 0.0 3:48.25 loop 20796 root 20 0 1760 528 436 R 33 0.0 2:38.65 nc Notes: - Both task exec time and hard irq time reported correctly. - hi and si time are based on fine granularity info and not on samples. - getrusage would give proper utime/stime split not including irq times in that ratio. - Other places that report user/sys time like, cgroup cpuacct.stat will now include only non-irq exectime. Thanks, Venki Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com> -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists