Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 16:33:01 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cputime: fix invalid gtime in proc
Message-ID: <20151113153300.GB14397@lerouge>
References: <7F861DC0615E0C47A872E6F3C5FCDDBD05F575AA@BPXM14GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
 <20151102161351.GT3604@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20151104161455.GB12889@lerouge>
 <7F861DC0615E0C47A872E6F3C5FCDDBD05F6B430@BPXM14GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7F861DC0615E0C47A872E6F3C5FCDDBD05F6B430@BPXM14GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1781
Lines: 43

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 08:43:17AM +0000, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] cputime: fix invalid gtime in proc
> > 
> > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 05:13:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 12:46:39AM +0000, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
> > > > +++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
> > > > @@ -786,6 +786,9 @@ cputime_t task_gtime(struct task_struct *t)
> > > >  	unsigned int seq;
> > > >  	cputime_t gtime;
> > > >
> > > > +	if (!context_tracking_is_enabled())
> > > > +		return t->gtime;
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Yeah, not happy about that.. why do we have to touch context tracking
> > > muck to find vtime state etc.
> > 
> > That's right, this is because it is deemed to be a quick and non invasive fix
> > to be backported.
> > 
> > Then will come the more invasive but proper fix consisting in having
> > vtime_accounting_enabled() telling if vtime is running on any CPU and
> > vtime_accounting_cpu_enabled(). The first will be used for remote readers
> > (as in this patch) and the second for writers.
> > 
> > Since we are dealing with a regression, it's better to minimize the changes.
> > AFAICT, the regression got introduced in 2012:
> > 
> >   6a61671bb2f3a1bd12cd17b8fca811a624782632
> >   ("cputime: Safely read cputime of full dynticks CPUs")
> 
> Is this patch going to apply to fix the regression?

Peter, if you have doubts, I can integrate this change in a larger
series that does a proper cleanup. But this very patch will still need
to be tagged as stable for backport.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/