[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5545172F.5090705@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 14:27:59 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, williams@...hat.com,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, fweisbec@...hat.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable
& enable from context tracking on syscall entry
On 05/02/2015 01:27 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Regarding the user/kernel execution time split measurement:
>
> 1) the same flag could be used to sample a remote CPU's statistics
> from another CPU and update the stats in the currently executing task.
> As long as there's at least one non-nohz-full CPU, this would work. Or
> are there systems were all CPUs are nohz-full?
On a NO_HZ_FULL system, you need at least one CPU to execute
RCU callbacks, and do other system things like that, so there
is at least one CPU that is not nohz_full.
On NUMA systems, I could even see the sane option being one
CPU that is not isolated or nohz_full per NUMA node, so we
have a place to route irqs, etc...
> 2) Alternatively we could just drive user/kernel split statistics from
> context switches, which would be inaccurate if the workload is
> SCHED_FIFO that only rarely context switches.
>
> How does this sound?
I think option (1) sounds nicer :)
What locks do we need, besides the runqueue lock to make sure
the task does not go away, and later the task's vtime_lock to
update its time statistics?
Do we even need the lock_trace(task) as taken in proc_pid_stack(),
since all we care is whether or not the thing is in kernel, user,
or guest mode?
For guest mode, we set a flag in the task struct somewhere, that
part is easy.
It also looks like dump_trace() can distinguish between normal,
exception, and irq stacks. Not sure how fancy we need to get...
--
All rights reversed
--
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