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]
Date:   Mon, 23 Jul 2018 11:21:18 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        frederic@...nel.org, lcapitulino@...hat.com,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, tj@...nel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] sched/cputime: Ensure accurate utime and stime
 ratio in cputime_adjust()

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:08:36PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> The trace data corresponds to the last sample period:
> trace entry 1:
>              cat-20755 [022] d...  1370.106496: cputime_adjust: task
> tick-based utime 362560000000 stime 2551000000, scheduler rtime 333060702626
>              cat-20755 [022] d...  1370.106497: cputime_adjust: result:
> old utime 330729718142 stime 2306983867, new utime 330733635372 stime
> 2327067254
> 
> trace entry 2:
>              cat-20773 [005] d...  1371.109825: cputime_adjust: task
> tick-based utime 362567000000 stime 3547000000, scheduler rtime 334063718912
>              cat-20773 [005] d...  1371.109826: cputime_adjust: result:
> old utime 330733635372 stime 2327067254, new utime 330827229702 stime
> 3236489210
> 
> 1) expected behaviour
> Let's compare the last two trace entries(all the data below is in ns):
> task tick-based utime: 362560000000->362567000000 increased 7000000
> task tick-based stime: 2551000000  ->3547000000   increased 996000000
> scheduler rtime:       333060702626->334063718912 increased 1003016286
> 
> The application actually runs almost 100%sys at the moment, we can
> use the task tick-based utime and stime increased to double check:
> 996000000/(7000000+996000000) > 99%sys
> 
> 2) the current cputime_adjust() inaccurate result
> But for the current cputime_adjust(), we get the following adjusted
> utime and stime increase in this sample period:
> adjusted utime: 330733635372->330827229702 increased 93594330
> adjusted stime: 2327067254  ->3236489210   increased 909421956
> 
> so 909421956/(93594330+909421956)=91%sys as the shell script shows above.
> 
> 3) root cause
> The root cause of the issue is that the current cputime_adjust() always
> passes the whole times to scale_stime() to split the whole utime and
> stime. In this patch, we pass all the increased deltas in 1) within
> user's sample period to scale_stime() instead and accumulate the
> corresponding results to the previous saved adjusted utime and stime,
> so guarantee the accurate usr and sys increase within the user sample
> period.

But why it this a problem?

Since its sample based there's really nothing much you can guarantee.
What if your test program were to run in userspace for 50% of the time
but is so constructed to always be in kernel space when the tick
happens?

Then you would 'expect' it to be 50% user and 50% sys, but you're also
not getting that.

This stuff cannot be perfect, and the current code provides 'sensible'
numbers over the long run for most programs. Why muck with it?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ