Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200930024712.88258-1-qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
 <20200930081953.GU2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAKc596Jc6H5qFxrzSp_fGhqTZt-5ORLoP=E4bwG-QzkpRiL2bA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200930095719.GW2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20200930095719.GW2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:08:05 +0800
Message-ID: <CAKc596L6vzf=C7BvzWQH7kObSM_kGSxuf7idY6fr722sguNykA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched/fair: Fix the wrong sched_stat_wait time
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        juri.lelli@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>, mgorman@suse.de,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> =E4=BA=8E2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=8830=E6=
=97=A5=E5=91=A8=E4=B8=89 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=885:57=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:16:29PM +0800, jun qian wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> =E4=BA=8E2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=883=
0=E6=97=A5=E5=91=A8=E4=B8=89 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=884:20=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=
=9A
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:47:12AM +0800, qianjun.kernel@gmail.com wr=
ote:
> > > > From: jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > When the sched_schedstat changes from 0 to 1, some sched se maybe
> > > > already in the runqueue, the se->statistics.wait_start will be 0.
> > > > So it will let the (rq_of(cfs_rq)) - se->statistics.wait_start)
> > > > wrong. We need to avoid this scenario.
> > >
> > > Is this really the only problem there? Did you do a full audit of tha=
t
> > > schedstat nonsense?
> > >
> >
> > Did you mean that the sched_stat_xxx's xxx_start(sched_stat_sleep
> > sched_stat_iowait sched_stat_blocked
> > sched_stat_runtime) may be also depend the schedstat_enabled?
>
> Yeah, this runtime schedstat_enabled thing is fairly recent, it used to
> be an always on/off kinda thing.
>
> At the time we figured inconsistencies from dynamically
> enabling/disabling it were okay, it's just stats after all.
>
> But if you now want to 'fix' that, then a full audit might be nice.
>
> > I have searched the codes, and found that these sched_stat_xxx's
> > xxx_start don't depend the schedstat_enabled
> > except the wait_start.
>
> OK, so you did the audit and only found this one issue? That's good
> Changelog material :-)
>

I found another problem, when the sched_schedstat changes from 1 to 0,
the sched se
which is already in the runqueue, the statistics.wait_start already
has a value. At this moment
sched_schedstat changes from 0 to 1 again, the (rq_of(cfs_rq)) -
se->statistics.wait_start)
will not be 0 and the wait time will be bigger than the real one. So
we need to modify the  patch
to resolve the problem with this scenario.

So I really need a full audit might, =EF=BC=9A-)

Thanks

> Thanks!