[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201014130223.GF2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 15:02:23 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Allen Pais <allen.lkml@...il.com>,
Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: correct account of irqtime
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 09:50:44PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> __do_softirq() may be interrupted by hardware interrupts. In this case,
> irqtime_account_irq() will account the time slice as CPUTIME_SOFTIRQ by
> mistake.
>
> By passing irqtime_account_irq() an extra param about either hardirq or
> softirq, irqtime_account_irq() can handle the above case.
I'm not sure I see the scenario in which it goes wrong.
irqtime_account_irq() is designed such that we're called with the old
preempt_count on enter and the new preempt_count on exit. This way we'll
accumuate the delta to the previous context.
> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ void irqtime_account_irq(struct task_struct *curr)
> */
> if (hardirq_count())
> irqtime_account_delta(irqtime, delta, CPUTIME_IRQ);
> - else if (in_serving_softirq() && curr != this_cpu_ksoftirqd())
> + else if (in_serving_softirq() && curr != this_cpu_ksoftirqd() && !hardirq)
> irqtime_account_delta(irqtime, delta, CPUTIME_SOFTIRQ);
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists