2019-10-21 12:52:07

by Huacai Chen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 110/110] lib/vdso: Improve do_hres() and update vdso data unconditionally

In do_hres(), we currently use whether the return value of __arch_get_
hw_counter() is negative to indicate fallback, but this is not a good
idea because:

1, ARM64 returns ULL_MAX but MIPS returns 0 when clock_mode is invalid;
2, For a 64bit counter, a "negative" value of counter is actually valid.

It is sure that MIPS has a bug when clock_mode is invalid and should
return ULL_MAX as ARM64 does (Vincenzo has already submitted a patch).
But do_hres() can still be improved so we use U64_MAX as the only
"invalid" return value -- this is still not fully correct, but it is
the simplest fix and has no problem in most cases (we can hardly see a
64bit counter overflow).

By the way, currently update_vdso_data() and update_vsyscall_tz() rely
on __arch_use_vsyscall(), which causes __cvdso_clock_getres() and some
other functions get wrong results when clock_mode is invalid. So, we
update vdso data unconditionally.

Fixes: 00b26474c2f1613d7ab894c5 ("lib/vdso: Provide generic VDSO implementation")
Fixes: 44f57d788e7deecb50484353 ("timekeeping: Provide a generic update_vsyscall() implementation")
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Burton <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <[email protected]>
---
kernel/time/vsyscall.c | 9 +++------
lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/vsyscall.c b/kernel/time/vsyscall.c
index 4bc37ac..5ee0f77 100644
--- a/kernel/time/vsyscall.c
+++ b/kernel/time/vsyscall.c
@@ -110,8 +110,7 @@ void update_vsyscall(struct timekeeper *tk)
nsec = nsec + tk->wall_to_monotonic.tv_nsec;
vdso_ts->sec += __iter_div_u64_rem(nsec, NSEC_PER_SEC, &vdso_ts->nsec);

- if (__arch_use_vsyscall(vdata))
- update_vdso_data(vdata, tk);
+ update_vdso_data(vdata, tk);

__arch_update_vsyscall(vdata, tk);

@@ -124,10 +123,8 @@ void update_vsyscall_tz(void)
{
struct vdso_data *vdata = __arch_get_k_vdso_data();

- if (__arch_use_vsyscall(vdata)) {
- vdata[CS_HRES_COARSE].tz_minuteswest = sys_tz.tz_minuteswest;
- vdata[CS_HRES_COARSE].tz_dsttime = sys_tz.tz_dsttime;
- }
+ vdata[CS_HRES_COARSE].tz_minuteswest = sys_tz.tz_minuteswest;
+ vdata[CS_HRES_COARSE].tz_dsttime = sys_tz.tz_dsttime;

__arch_sync_vdso_data(vdata);
}
diff --git a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
index e630e7f..5a31643 100644
--- a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
+++ b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int do_hres(const struct vdso_data *vd, clockid_t clk,
cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
last = vd->cycle_last;
- if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
+ if (unlikely(cycles == U64_MAX))
return -1;

ns += vdso_calc_delta(cycles, last, vd->mask, vd->mult);
--
2.7.0


2019-10-21 14:55:10

by Thomas Gleixner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 110/110] lib/vdso: Improve do_hres() and update vdso data unconditionally

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Huacai Chen wrote:
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int do_hres(const struct vdso_data *vd, clockid_t clk,
> cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
> ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
> last = vd->cycle_last;
> - if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
> + if (unlikely(cycles == U64_MAX))
> return -1;

That used to create worse code than the weird (s64) type cast which has the
same effect. Did you double check that there is no change?

Thanks,

tglx

2019-10-21 14:59:06

by Thomas Gleixner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 110/110] lib/vdso: Improve do_hres() and update vdso data unconditionally

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int do_hres(const struct vdso_data *vd, clockid_t clk,
> > cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
> > ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
> > last = vd->cycle_last;
> > - if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
> > + if (unlikely(cycles == U64_MAX))
> > return -1;
>
> That used to create worse code than the weird (s64) type cast which has the
> same effect. Did you double check that there is no change?

It still does for 32bit.

2019-10-22 02:38:02

by Huacai Chen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 110/110] lib/vdso: Improve do_hres() and update vdso data unconditionally

Hi, Thomas,

If we use (s64)cycles < 0, then how to solve the problem that a 64bit
counter become negative?

Maybe we can change the "invalid" value from U64_MAX to 0? I think
the performance of "cycles == 0" is better than "cycles == U64_MAX".

Huacai

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:58 PM Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int do_hres(const struct vdso_data *vd, clockid_t clk,
> > > cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
> > > ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
> > > last = vd->cycle_last;
> > > - if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
> > > + if (unlikely(cycles == U64_MAX))
> > > return -1;
> >
> > That used to create worse code than the weird (s64) type cast which has the
> > same effect. Did you double check that there is no change?
>
> It still does for 32bit.

2019-10-23 12:34:55

by Thomas Gleixner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 110/110] lib/vdso: Improve do_hres() and update vdso data unconditionally

On Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Huacai Chen wrote:

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

Look for Toppost

> If we use (s64)cycles < 0, then how to solve the problem that a 64bit
> counter become negative?

I doubt that you will be able to observe that. A 64bit value becomes
negative after 1<<63 cycles, i.e. at 1GHz thats 292 years of uptime.

What's your problem?

Thanks,

tglx