linux-kernel - Re: [lkp] [sched/fair] 41e0d37f7a: divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANRm+CwhO6FfFd3B0NHj+=Mjp_GwbxnHYwYk_zZ7ZYutwhHD8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2016 19:46:15 +0800
From:	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	kernel test robot <ying.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@...aro.org>, lkp@...org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@....com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Steve Muckle <smuckle@...aro.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [lkp] [sched/fair] 41e0d37f7a: divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP

2016-05-04 19:41 GMT+08:00 Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>:
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com> wrote:
>> 2016-05-03 21:33 GMT+08:00 Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>:
>>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com> wrote:
>>>> 2016-05-03 17:19 GMT+08:00 Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>:
>>>>> 2016-05-03 16:32 GMT+08:00 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>:
>>>>>> On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:10:51AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
>>>>> ----snip----
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>>> index 8b5a415..57b3843 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>>> @@ -1241,6 +1241,7 @@ static int intel_pstate_init_cpu(unsigned int cpunum)
>>>>>         intel_pstate_get_cpu_pstates(cpu);
>>>>>
>>>>>         intel_pstate_busy_pid_reset(cpu);
>>>>> +       intel_pstate_sample(cpu);
>>>>
>>>> intel_pstate_sample(cpu, 0);
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         cpu->update_util.func = intel_pstate_update_util;
>>>
>>> That would avoid the divide by 0, but the value returned by
>>> intel_pstate_get() would still be bogus.
>>
>> If your bogus means that some data is stale and could you explain more?
>
> get_avg_frequency() expects sample.aperf to be a delta between two
> different values of the APERF register obtained at two different
> instants of time, and analogously for sample.mperf, because that's
> when the formula used by it is guaranteed to be valid.  This means
> that it generally is not sufficient to read those registers just once
> to get a meaningful result, they need to be read at least twice for
> that (with some time between the reads to let the counters grow
> sufficiently).
>
> With your modification sample.aperf and sample.mperf would simply
> contain the values of APERF and MPERF, respectively, at the the
> intel_pstate_sample(cpu, 0) invocation time, so using them in the
> computation would not be guaranteed to lead to a meaningful result.

I see, thanks Rafael.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li