2016-08-13 16:42 GMT+08:00 Ingo Molnar :
>
> * Rik van Riel wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
>> Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>
>> > The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count actually
>> > elapsed irq & softirq time".
>>
>> Wanpeng, does this patch fix your issue?
>>
>> Paolo,
2016-08-16 22:01 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 14:54 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-08-16 10:11 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> > On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 09:31 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> > > 2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> > > > On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpen
On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 14:54 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-08-16 10:11 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 09:31 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > > 2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > > > On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > > > > 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00
2016-08-16 10:11 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 09:31 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> > On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> > > 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> > > [...]
>> > > > Wanpeng, does the patch belo
On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 09:31 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > > 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > > [...]
> > > > Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
> > >
> > > It will break steal
2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> [...]
>> > Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
>>
>> It will break steal time for full dynticks guest, and there is a
>> calltrace of thread_group
2016-08-15 23:00 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> [...]
>> > Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
>>
>> It will break steal time for full dynticks guest, and there is a
>> calltrace of thread_group
On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 16:53 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> [...]
> > Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
>
> It will break steal time for full dynticks guest, and there is a
> calltrace of thread_group_cputime_adjusted call stack, RIP is
> cputime_ad
2016-08-15 16:53 GMT+08:00 Wanpeng Li :
> 2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> [...]
>> Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
>
> It will break steal time for full dynticks guest, and there is a
> calltrace of thread_group_cputime_adjusted call stack, RIP is
> cputime_adjust+0xff/0x130
2016-08-12 23:58 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
[...]
> Wanpeng, does the patch below work for you?
It will break steal time for full dynticks guest, and there is a
calltrace of thread_group_cputime_adjusted call stack, RIP is
cputime_adjust+0xff/0x130.
>
> Everybody else, does this patch look acceptab
On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 10:42 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
> > Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >
> > > The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count
> > > actually
> > > elapsed irq & softirq time".
> >
> > Wanpeng, does this patch f
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:58:03AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 15:09:00 +0800
> Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > 2016-08-12 10:44 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>
> > > If you pass ULONG_MAX as the maxtime argument to
> > > steal_account_process_time(), does the steal time
> > > get accounted
* Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
> Wanpeng Li 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 thi
> There is one copy of paravirt_steal_clock(smp_processor_id()),
> but what keeps it in sync with this_rq()->prev_steal_time?
>
> Is it something simple like them both being zeroed out when
> the structures are first allocated at boot time?
Yes, more precisely both of them being equal when the MS
On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 18:33 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2016 18:52, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > 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
> >
On 10/08/2016 18:52, Rik van Riel wrote:
> 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..
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 15:09:00 +0800
Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-08-12 10:44 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > If you pass ULONG_MAX as the maxtime argument to
> > steal_account_process_time(), does the steal time
> > get accounted properly at 75%?
>
> Yes.
I talked with Paolo this morning, and it turn
2016-08-12 10:44 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Thu, 2016-08-11 at 18:11 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2016-08-11 0:52 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
>> > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
>> > Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> >
>> > > The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count
>> > > actually
>> > >
On Thu, 2016-08-11 at 18:11 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2016-08-11 0:52 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
> > Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >
> > > The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count
> > > actually
> > > elapsed irq & softirq time".
> >
> > Wanpeng, doe
2016-08-11 0:52 GMT+08:00 Rik van Riel :
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:39:08 +0800
> Wanpeng Li wrote:
>
>> The regression is caused by your commit "sched,time: Count actually
>> elapsed irq & softirq time".
>
> Wanpeng, does this patch fix your issue?
I test this against kvm guest (nohz_full, four vC
20 matches
Mail list logo
