[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230112033811.58924-1-yangjihong1@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:38:11 +0800
From: Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@...wei.com>
To: <peterz@...radead.org>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <acme@...nel.org>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
<jolsa@...nel.org>, <namhyung@...nel.org>,
<linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <yangjihong1@...wei.com>
Subject: [PATCH] perf/core: Fix account interrupt throttle
In literal sense of "max_samples_per_tick", if hwc->interrupts ==
max_samples_per_tick, it should not be throttled, therefore, the judgment
condition should be changed to "hwc->interrupts > max_samples_per_tick".
In fact, this may cause the hardlockup to fail, The minimum value of
max_samples_per_tick may be 1, in this case, the return value of
__perf_event_account_interrupt function is 1.
As a result, nmi_watchdog gets throttled, which would stop PMU (Use x86
architecture as an example, see x86_pmu_handle_irq).
Signed-off-by: Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@...wei.com>
---
kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index d56328e5080e..ced98e028d86 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -9414,7 +9414,7 @@ __perf_event_account_interrupt(struct perf_event *event, int throttle)
} else {
hwc->interrupts++;
if (unlikely(throttle
- && hwc->interrupts >= max_samples_per_tick)) {
+ && hwc->interrupts > max_samples_per_tick)) {
__this_cpu_inc(perf_throttled_count);
tick_dep_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), TICK_DEP_BIT_PERF_EVENTS);
hwc->interrupts = MAX_INTERRUPTS;
--
2.30.GIT
Powered by blists - more mailing lists