Message-ID: <20210325083411.GA77653@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:34:11 +0800
From:   Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>, andi.kleen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: don't run watchdog forever

Hi Thomas,

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 04:50:31PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02 2021 at 20:06, Feng Tang wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:16:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:54:24AM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> >> > clocksource watchdog runs every 500ms, which creates some OS noise.
> >> > As the clocksource wreckage (especially for those that has per-cpu
> >> > reading hook) usually happens shortly after CPU is brought up or
> >> > after system resumes from sleep state, so add a time limit for
> >> > clocksource watchdog to only run for a period of time, and make
> >> > sure it run at least twice for each CPU.
> >> > 
> >> > Regarding performance data, there is no improvement data with the
> >> > micro-benchmarks we have like hackbench/netperf/fio/will-it-scale
> >> > etc. But it obviously reduces periodic timer interrupts, and may
> >> > help in following cases:
> >> > * When some CPUs are isolated to only run scientific or high
> >> >   performance computing tasks on a NOHZ_FULL kernel, where there
> >> >   is almost no interrupts, this could make it more quiet
> >> > * On a cluster which runs a lot of systems in parallel with
> >> >   barriers there are always enough systems which run the watchdog
> >> >   and make everyone else wait
> >> > 
> >> > Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
> >> 
> >> Urgh.. so this hopes and prays that the TSC wrackage happens in the
> >> first 10 minutes after boot.
> 
> which is wishful thinking....
> 
> > Yes, the 10 minutes part is only based on our past experience and we
> > can make it longer. But if there was real case that the wrackage happened
> > long after CPU is brought up like days, then this patch won't help
> > much.
> 
> It really depends on the BIOS wreckage. On one of my machine it takes up
> to a day depending on the workload.
> 
> Anything pre TSC_ADJUST wants the watchdog on. With TSC ADJUST available
> we can probably avoid it.
> 
> There is a caveat though. If the machine never goes idle then TSC adjust
> is not able to detect a potential wreckage. OTOH, most of the broken
> BIOSes tweak TSC only by a few cycles and that is usually detectable
> during boot. So we might be clever about it and schedule a check every
> hour when during the first 10 minutes a modification of TSC adjust is
> seen on any CPU.

I've thought about implementing this (sorry for delay), and would
clarify something to understand it correctly. This hourly check is only
for x86's tsc_adjust overriden by BIOS, and not the general kernel watchdog?
As the current clocksources have different wrap time, like acpi_pm timer
will wrap around every 4 seconds, and hpet wraps about every 300 scconds,
we can only either keep doing the watchdog check or cancel it.

If so, we can start a timer fired 10 minutes later to check it, and extend
the timer to 1 hour if there is no tsc_adjust overridden.

I've checked one open-sourced BIOS code project: EDK2 (https://github.com/tianocore/edk2),
where I did some grep and can't find places writting to tsc_adjust msr,
which can give us more confidence that fewer and fewer BIOS will wrongly
write to tsc_adjust msr :)

Thanks,
Feng

Powered by blists - more mailing lists