[lttng-dev] LTTng - Xenomai : different results between timestamp-lttng and rt_time_read()

[MONTET Julien]

Hello Mathieu, Norbert and Jan,

Thank you for all of your explainations and the overview of the system.
No I didn't change the ipipe patch for the vDSO, I may try this.
If I have correctly understood, this patch prevents Cobalt from entering in a deadlock when the kernel is using the vDSO and the program interrupts the kernel at the same time. On which kernel does it word (aroubd 4.19) ?
I currently try to avoid kernel 5.4 because I remember I faced some boot issues (but it is on another topic).

Here the issues i faced (drawn on TraceCompass). Are these the deadlocks we are talking about ?
https://postimg.cc/BP4G3bF0 (on 11:02:56:380)
https://postimg.cc/q6wHvrcC

Regards,


________________________________
De : Norbert Lange <nolange79 at gmail.com>
Envoyé : jeudi 20 mai 2021 17:39
À : Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com>
Cc : MONTET Julien <julien.montet at reseau.eseo.fr>; lttng-dev <lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org>; Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka at siemens.com>; Xenomai <xenomai at xenomai.org>
Objet : Re: [lttng-dev] LTTng - Xenomai : different results between timestamp-lttng and rt_time_read()

Am Do., 20. Mai 2021 um 17:09 Uhr schrieb Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com>:
>
> ----- On May 20, 2021, at 9:56 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com wrote:
>
> > ----- On May 20, 2021, at 9:54 AM, lttng-dev lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org wrote:
> >
> >> ----- On May 20, 2021, at 5:11 AM, lttng-dev lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org wrote:
> >>
> >>> Am Do., 20. Mai 2021 um 10:28 Uhr schrieb MONTET Julien
> >>> <julien.montet at reseau.eseo.fr>:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Norbert,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for your answer !
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, I am using a Xenomai cobalt - xenomai is 3.1
> >>>> cat /proc/xenomai/version => 3.1
> >>>>
> >>>> After the installation, I tested "test tools" in /proc/xenomai/ and it worked
> >>>> nice.
> >>>
> >>> Just asked to make sure, thought the scripts usual add some -xeno tag
> >>> to the kernel version.
> >>>
> >>>> What do you mean by "it might deadlock really good" ?
> >>>
> >>> clock_gettime will either use a syscall (kills realtime always) or is
> >>> optimized via VDSO (which very likely is your case).
> >>>
> >>> What happens is that the kernel will take a spinlock, then write new
> >>> values, then releases the spinlock.
> >>> your program will aswell spin (but just to see if the spinlock is
> >>> free), read the values and interpolates them.
> >>>
> >>> But if your program interrupts the kernel while the kernel holds the
> >>> lock (all on the same cpu core), then it will spin forever and the
> >>> kernel will never execute.
> >>
> >> Just one clarification: the specific locking strategy used by the
> >> Linux kernel monotonic clock vDSO is a "seqlock", where the kernel
> >> sets a bit which keeps concurrent readers looping until they observe
> >
> > When I say "sets a bit", I actually mean "increment a sequence counter",
> > and readers observe either odd or even state, thus knowing whether
> > they need to retry, and whether the value read before/after reading
> > the data structure changed.
>
> Looking again at the Linux kernel's kernel/time/vsyscall.c implementation
> of vdso_update_{begin,end}, I notice that interrupts are disabled across
> the entire update. So I understand that the Interrupt pipeline (I-pipe)
> interrupt gets delivered even when the kernel disables interrupts. Did
> you consider modifying the I-pipe kernel patch to change the vdso update so
> it updates the vdso from within an I-pipe virq handler ?

Yes, I did use an non-upstreamed patch for a while to get things in order:
https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.xenomai.org%2Fpipermail%2Fxenomai%2F2018-December%2F040134.html&data=04%7C01%7Cjulien.montet%40reseau.eseo.fr%7Cef0b71ac314f4ab2321f08d91ba57c9d%7C4d7ad1591265437ab9f62946247d5bf9%7C0%7C0%7C637571219835495365%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=dOiRFzeKFQA%2B25R6aqrjL2ZJMkV5c782DSBGiHHoYZc%3D&reserved=0

I would prefer just a NMI safe source that might jump back a bit, no matter how.

> AFAIU this would allow Xenomai userspace to use the Linux kernel vDSO
> clock sources.

The Xenomai folks are trying to get their next-gen abstraction "dovetail" closer
coupled to the kernel, AFAIR their will be VDSO support and
unification of the clock sources.

Still need to get stuff running today =)

Norbert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/attachments/20210521/b6d4a3b0/attachment.htm>