[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151104161455.GB12889@lerouge>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:14:57 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cputime: fix invalid gtime in proc
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 05:13:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 12:46:39AM +0000, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> > @@ -786,6 +786,9 @@ cputime_t task_gtime(struct task_struct *t)
> > unsigned int seq;
> > cputime_t gtime;
> >
> > + if (!context_tracking_is_enabled())
> > + return t->gtime;
> > +
>
> Yeah, not happy about that.. why do we have to touch context tracking
> muck to find vtime state etc.
That's right, this is because it is deemed to be a quick and non invasive fix
to be backported.
Then will come the more invasive but proper fix consisting in having
vtime_accounting_enabled() telling if vtime is running on any CPU and
vtime_accounting_cpu_enabled(). The first will be used for remote readers
(as in this patch) and the second for writers.
Since we are dealing with a regression, it's better to minimize the changes.
AFAICT, the regression got introduced in 2012:
6a61671bb2f3a1bd12cd17b8fca811a624782632
("cputime: Safely read cputime of full dynticks CPUs")
>
> > do {
> > seq = read_seqbegin(&t->vtime_seqlock);
> >
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
--
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