Re: [BUG] Paravirtual time accounting / IRQ time accounting
From: Mike Galbraith
Date: Fri Mar 21 2014 - 01:50:31 EST
On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 12:01 -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 6:42 AM, <lwcheng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > In consolidated environments, when there are multiple virtual machines (VMs)
> > running on one CPU core, timekeeping will be a problem to the guest OS.
> > Here, I report my findings about Linux process scheduler.
> >
> >
> > Description
> > ------------
> > Linux CFS relies on rq->clock_task to charge each task, determine vruntime,
> > etc.
> >
> > When CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING is enabled, the time spent on serving IRQ
> > will be excluded from updating rq->clock_task.
> > When CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING is enabled, the time stolen by the
> > hypervisor
> > will also be excluded from updating rq->clock_task.
> >
> > With "both" CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING and CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING
> > enabled,
> > I put three KVM guests on one core and run hackbench in each guest. I find
> > that
> > in the guests, rq->clock_task stays *unchanged*. The malfunction embarrasses
> > CFS.
> > ------------
> >
> >
> > Analysis
> > ------------
> > [src/kernel/sched/core.c]
> > static void update_rq_clock_task(struct rq *rq, s64 delta)
> > {
> > ... ...
> > #ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING
> > irq_delta = irq_time_read(cpu_of(rq)) - rq->prev_irq_time;
> > ... ...
> > rq->prev_irq_time += irq_delta;
> > delta -= irq_delta;
> > #endif
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_TIME_ACCOUNTING
> > if (static_key_false((¶virt_steal_rq_enabled))) {
> > steal = paravirt_steal_clock(cpu_of(rq));
> > steal -= rq->prev_steal_time_rq;
> > ... ...
> > rq->prev_steal_time_rq += steal;
> > delta -= steal;
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > rq->clock_task += delta;
> > ... ...
> > }
> > --
> > "delta" -> the intended increment to rq->clock_task
> > "irq_delta" -> the time spent on serving IRQ (hard + soft)
> > "steal" -> the time stolen by the underlying hypervisor
> > --
> > "irq_delta" is calculated based on sched_clock_cpu(), which is vulnerable
> > to VM scheduling delays.
>
> This looks like a real problem indeed. The main problem in searching
> for a solution, is that of course not all of the irq time is steal
> time and vice versa. In this case, we could subtract irq_time from
> steal, and add only the steal part time that is in excess. I don't
> think this is 100 % guaranteed, but maybe it is a good approximation.
>
> Rik, do you have an opinion on this ?
Hrm, on my little Q6600 box, I'm running 3 VMS all pinned to CPU3, all
running hackbench -l zillion, one of them also running crash, staring at
it's sole rq->clock_task as I write this, with kernels (3.11.10) on both
host and guest configured as reported.
clock_task = 631322187004,
clock_task = 631387807452,
clock_task = 631474214294,
clock_task = 631523864893,
clock_task = 631604646268,
clock_task = 631643276025,
Maybe 3 VMs isn't enough overload for such a beastly CPU. Top reports
some very funky utilization numbers, but other than that, the things
seem to work fine here. perf thinks scheduling work too.
-Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/