linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] xen/arm: account for stolen ticks

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1305071448390.4147@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Tue, 7 May 2013 14:49:46 +0100
From:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
CC:	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] xen/arm: account for stolen
 ticks

On Tue, 7 May 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > @@ -301,6 +320,10 @@ static int __init xen_init_events(void)
> > > >  
> > > >  	on_each_cpu(xen_percpu_init, NULL, 0);
> > > >  
> > > > +	pv_time_ops.steal_clock = xen_stolen_accounting;
> > > > +	static_key_slow_inc(&paravirt_steal_enabled);
> > > > +	static_key_slow_inc(&paravirt_steal_rq_enabled);
> > > 
> > > We don't seem to do this on x86 -- is that a bug on x86 on Xen?
> > 
> > On x86 we do all the accounting in do_stolen_accounting, called from our
> > own interrupt handler (xen_timer_interrupt).
> > I don't think we would gain anything by using the common infrastructure,
> > we would actually loose the idle ticks accounting we do there.
> > 
> > Speaking of which, I don't think that pv_time_ops.steal_clock would
> > properly increase CPUTIME_IDLE the way we do in do_stolen_accounting.
> > 
> > How much of an issue is that?
> 
> Doesn't the generic account_idle_time handle this?

AFAICT only if the rq is idle, while do_stolen_accounting would account
for ticks in RUNSTATE_blocked
--
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/