From patchwork Fri Aug 28 08:58:52 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Stefan Liebler X-Patchwork-Id: 1353100 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=sourceware.org (client-ip=8.43.85.97; helo=sourceware.org; envelope-from=libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sourceware.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=swW+Bqjq; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BdD6r6wtFz9sSn for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 18:59:16 +1000 (AEST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C183857C75; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:14 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 44C183857C75 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1598605154; bh=3cB1R2dLw/yQurGGvOzaiOwMewCiHB1YsD/JWYMvObE=; h=To:Subject:Date:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:From; b=swW+BqjqHb/iPZMuF1m288/hLe1hTEbPIfclWoyOLg6kdYCiz1aY17y1sEDIT8xv+ /tXrVxzLFGxabiB60wy/9k7lKX/TIJPJr9i+zKB5HQIEeg64CjDBKuXIcKQCu91oIh nH01tXF676b3t9qKsBBKPylZyuohwVGU4GvABesc= X-Original-To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Delivered-To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02DB23857C48 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 02DB23857C48 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07S8WEYt096281 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 04:59:11 -0400 Received: from ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (62.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.98]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 336vf145qp-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 04:59:11 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07S8v0qt019455 for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:09 GMT Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.26.194]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 336buh0y72-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:09 +0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 07S8x6gV55902560 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:06 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B588311C04C; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92F3811C052; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m35lp38.lnxne.boe (unknown [9.152.108.100]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:59:06 +0000 (GMT) To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: [PATCH] Loosen the limits of time/tst-cpuclock1. Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:58:52 +0200 Message-Id: <20200828085852.1861153-1-stli@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-08-28_05:2020-08-28, 2020-08-28 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=1 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008280061 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Patchwork-Original-From: Stefan Liebler via Libc-alpha From: Stefan Liebler Reply-To: Stefan Liebler Cc: Stefan Liebler Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" Starting with the commit 04deeaa9ea74b0679dfc9d9155a37b6425f19a9f "Fix time/tst-cpuclock1 intermitent failures" (2020-07-11), this test fails quite often on s390x/s390 with one/multiple of those: "before - after" / "nanosleep time" / "dead - after" ourside reasonable range. On a zVM/kvm guest the CPUs are shared between multiple guests. And even on the lpar (kvm host) the CPUs are usually shared between multiple lpars. The defined CPUs for a lpar/zVM-system could also have lower weights compared to other lpars which let the steal time further grow. Usually I build (-j$(nproc)) and test (PARALLELMFLAGS="-j$(nproc)") glibc multiple times, e.g. with different GCCs, on various lpars or zVM guests at the same time. During this time, I've run the test for 13500 times and obvserved the following fails: ~600x "before - after" ~60x "nanosleep time" ~70x "dead - after" I've also observed a lot of "before - after" fails on a intel kvm-guest while building/testing glibc on it. The mentioned commit has tighten the limits of valid tv_nsec ranges: "before - after" (expected: 500000000): - 100000000 ... 600000000 + 450000000 ... 550000000 "nanosleep time" (expected: 100000000): - 100000000 ... 200000000 + 090000000 ... 120000000 "dead - after" (expected: 100000000): - ... 200000000 + 090000000 ... 120000000 The test itself forks a child process which chew_cpu (user- and kernel-space). The parent process sleeps with nanosleep(0.5s) and measures the child_clock time: diff = after - before" With much workload on the machine, the child won't make much progess and it can fall much beyond the minimum limit. Thus I've set this limit to 0.45%. Even with this limit, the test fails for 11..90 times. If set to 0.30% it fails only 1..8 times. Does this check makes sense at all? Afterwards the parent process sleeps with clock_nanosleep (child_clock, 0.1s): diff = afterns - after The test currently also allows 0.9 * 0.1s. Shouldn't we test the hard limit of 1.0 * 0.1s as minimum limit? Depending on the workload, the maximum limit can exceed the 1.2 * 0.1s. Therefore I've set the upper limit to 1.35. For "dead - after", the parent process kills the child process and waits long enough to let the child finish dying. Then it gets the time of the child: diff = dead - after Note that diff also contains the time for the previous clock_nanosleep. Thus you'll often see both fails at the same time. I've set the upper limit to 1.4. --- time/tst-cpuclock1.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/time/tst-cpuclock1.c b/time/tst-cpuclock1.c index 1ac611a92b..52a3485145 100644 --- a/time/tst-cpuclock1.c +++ b/time/tst-cpuclock1.c @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ do_test (void) percentile of values and use those values for our testing allowed range. */ struct timespec diff = timespec_sub (support_timespec_normalize (after), support_timespec_normalize (before)); - if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, .9, 1.1)) + if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, .45, 1.1)) { printf ("before - after %ju.%.9ju outside reasonable range\n", (uintmax_t) diff.tv_sec, (uintmax_t) diff.tv_nsec); @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ do_test (void) allowed range. */ diff = timespec_sub (support_timespec_normalize (afterns), support_timespec_normalize (after)); - if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, .9, 1.2)) + if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, 1.0, 1.35)) { printf ("nanosleep time %ju.%.9ju outside reasonable range\n", (uintmax_t) diff.tv_sec, (uintmax_t) diff.tv_nsec); @@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ do_test (void) diff = timespec_sub (support_timespec_normalize (dead), support_timespec_normalize (after)); sleeptime.tv_nsec = 100000000; - if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, .9, 1.2)) + if (!support_timespec_check_in_range (sleeptime, diff, 1.0, 1.4)) { printf ("dead - after %ju.%.9ju outside reasonable range\n", (uintmax_t) diff.tv_sec, (uintmax_t) diff.tv_nsec);