Re: [PATCH] time,virt: resync steal time when guest & host lose sync

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
> Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count actually
> > elapsed irq & softirq time".
> 
> Wanpeng, does this patch fix your issue?
> 
> Paolo, what is your opinion on this issue?
> 
> I can think of all kinds of ways in which guest and host might lose
> sync with steal time, from uninitialized values at boot, to guest
> pause, followed by save to disk, and reload, to live migration, to...
> 
> ---8<---
> 
> Subject: time,virt: resync steal time when guest & host lose sync
> 
> When guest and host wildly disagree on steal time, a guest can
> do several things:
> 1) Quickly account all the steal time at once (the kernel did this before
>    57430218317e ("sched/cputime: Count actually elapsed irq & softirq time"),
>    when steal_account_process_ticks got ULONG_MAX as its maximum value.
> 2) Stay out of sync for an indeterminate amount of time. This is what the
>    system does today.
> 3) Sync up the guest value to the host-provided value, without accounting
>    an absurdly large value in the cpu time statistics.
> 
> This patch makes the kernel do (3), which seems like the right thing
> to do.
> 
> The exact value of the threshold use probably does not matter too much,
> as long as it is long enough to cover all the timer ticks that passed
> during an idle period, because (irqtime_)account_idle_ticks can process
> a large amount of time all at once.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/cputime.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

fails to build on x86 allnoconfig:

  kernel/sched/cputime.c:524:10: error: too many arguments to function âsteal_account_process_timeâ

Thanks,

	Ingo