| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:08:30 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Query]: tick-sched: why don't we stop tick when we are running
idle task?
On 11 April 2014 20:48, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 04:53:35PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> I think there's assumptions that tick runs on the local cpu;
Yes, many function behave that way, i.e. with smp_processor_id() as
CPU.
> also what
> are you going to do when running it on all remote cpus takes longer than
> the tick?
>
>> Otherwise (and ideally) we need to make the scheduler code able to handle long periods without
>> calling scheduler_tick(). But this is a lot more plumbing. And the scheduler has gazillions
>> accounting stuffs to handle. Sounds like a big nightmare to take that direction.
>
> So i'm not at all sure what you guys are talking about, but it seems to
> me you should all put down the bong and have a detox round instead.
>
> This all sounds like a cure worse than the problem.
So, what I was working on isn't ready yet but I would like to show what lines
I have been trying on. In case that is completely incorrect and I should stop
making that work :)
Please share your feedback about this (Yes there are several parts broken
currently, specially the assumption that tick runs on local CPU):
NOTE: Its rebased over some cleanups I did which aren't sent to LKML yet.
---------x-------------------------x---------------
tick-sched: offload NO_HZ_FULL computation to timekeeping CPUs
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
---
include/linux/tick.h | 2 ++
kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 90
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/tick.h b/include/linux/tick.h
index 97bbb64..f8efa9f 100644
--- a/include/linux/tick.h
+++ b/include/linux/tick.h
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ enum tick_nohz_mode {
*/
struct tick_sched {
struct hrtimer sched_timer;
+ struct cpumask timekeeping_pending;
enum tick_nohz_mode nohz_mode;
unsigned long check_clocks;
unsigned long idle_jiffies;
@@ -77,6 +78,7 @@ struct tick_sched {
ktime_t iowait_sleeptime;
ktime_t sleep_length;
ktime_t idle_expires;
+ unsigned int cpu;
int inidle;
int idle_active;
int tick_stopped;
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index 2d0b154..7560bd0 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -532,13 +532,56 @@ u64 get_cpu_iowait_time_us(int cpu, u64 *last_update_time)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_cpu_iowait_time_us);
+static int tick_nohz_full_get_offload_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ const struct cpumask *nodemask = cpumask_of_node(cpu_to_node(cpu));
+ unsigned int offload_cpu;
+ cpumask_t cpumask;
+
+ /* Don't pick any NO_HZ_FULL cpu */
+ cpumask_andnot(&cpumask, cpu_online_mask, tick_nohz_full_mask);
+ cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &cpumask);
+
+ /* Try for same node. */
+ offload_cpu = cpumask_first_and(nodemask, &cpumask);
+ if (offload_cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
+ return offload_cpu;
+
+ /* Any online will do */
+ return cpumask_any(&cpumask);
+}
+
+static void tick_nohz_full_offload_timer(void *info)
+{
+ struct tick_sched *ts = info;
+ hrtimer_start_expires(&ts->sched_timer, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED);
+}
+
+static void tick_nohz_full_offload_tick(struct tick_sched *ts, ktime_t expires,
+ unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ unsigned int offload_cpu = tick_nohz_full_get_offload_cpu(cpu);
+
+ /* Offload accounting to timekeeper */
+ hrtimer_cancel(&ts->sched_timer);
+ hrtimer_set_expires(&ts->sched_timer, expires);
+
+ /*
+ * This is triggering a WARN_ON() as below routine doesn't support calls
+ * while interrupts are disabled. Need to think of some other way to get
+ * this fixed.
+ */
+ smp_call_function_single(offload_cpu, tick_nohz_full_offload_timer, ts,
+ true);
+}
+
static ktime_t tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(struct tick_sched *ts,
ktime_t now, int cpu)
{
unsigned long seq, last_jiffies, next_jiffies, delta_jiffies;
ktime_t last_update, expires, ret = { .tv64 = 0 };
unsigned long rcu_delta_jiffies;
- struct clock_event_device *dev = tick_get_cpu_device()->evtdev;
+ struct clock_event_device *dev = tick_get_device(cpu)->evtdev;
u64 time_delta;
time_delta = timekeeping_max_deferment();
@@ -661,8 +704,12 @@ static ktime_t tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(struct
tick_sched *ts,
}
if (ts->nohz_mode == NOHZ_MODE_HIGHRES) {
- hrtimer_start(&ts->sched_timer, expires,
- HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED);
+ if (ts->inidle)
+ hrtimer_start(&ts->sched_timer, expires,
+ HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED);
+ else
+ tick_nohz_full_offload_tick(ts, expires, cpu);
+
/* Check, if the timer was already in the past */
if (hrtimer_active(&ts->sched_timer))
goto out;
@@ -687,9 +734,7 @@ out:
static void tick_nohz_full_stop_tick(struct tick_sched *ts)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
- int cpu = smp_processor_id();
-
- if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu) || is_idle_task(current))
+ if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(ts->cpu) || is_idle_task(current))
return;
if (!ts->tick_stopped && ts->nohz_mode == NOHZ_MODE_INACTIVE)
@@ -698,7 +743,7 @@ static void tick_nohz_full_stop_tick(struct tick_sched *ts)
if (!can_stop_full_tick())
return;
- tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(ts, ktime_get(), cpu);
+ tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(ts, ktime_get(), ts->cpu);
#endif
}
@@ -824,11 +869,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tick_nohz_idle_enter);
void tick_nohz_irq_exit(void)
{
struct tick_sched *ts = &__get_cpu_var(tick_cpu_sched);
+ unsigned int cpu;
- if (ts->inidle)
+ if (ts->inidle) {
__tick_nohz_idle_enter(ts);
- else
+ } else {
tick_nohz_full_stop_tick(ts);
+
+ while (!cpumask_empty(&ts->timekeeping_pending)) {
+ cpu = cpumask_first(&ts->timekeeping_pending);
+ cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &ts->timekeeping_pending);
+
+ /* Try to stop tick of NO_HZ_FULL cpu */
+ tick_nohz_full_stop_tick(tick_get_tick_sched(cpu));
+ }
+ }
}
/**
@@ -1090,13 +1145,23 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart
tick_sched_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
{
struct tick_sched *ts =
container_of(timer, struct tick_sched, sched_timer);
+ struct tick_sched *this_ts = &__get_cpu_var(tick_cpu_sched);
ktime_t now = ktime_get();
- tick_sched_do_timer(now);
+ /* Running as timekeeper ? */
+ if (likely(ts == this_ts))
+ tick_sched_do_timer(now);
+ else
+ cpumask_set_cpu(ts->cpu, &this_ts->timekeeping_pending);
+
tick_sched_handle(ts);
hrtimer_forward(timer, now, tick_period);
+ /*
+ * Yes, we are scheduling next tick also while timekeeping on this_cpu.
+ * We will handle that from irq_exit().
+ */
return HRTIMER_RESTART;
}
@@ -1149,6 +1214,11 @@ void tick_setup_sched_timer(void)
tick_nohz_active = 1;
}
#endif
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
+ ts->cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ cpumask_clear(&ts->timekeeping_pending);
+#endif
}
#endif /* HIGH_RES_TIMERS */
--
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