Merge branch 'sched/core' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/linux-dynticks into sched/core

Pull CPU runtime stats/accounting fixes from Frederic Weisbecker:

 " Some users are complaining that their threadgroup's runtime accounting
   freezes after a week or so of intense cpu-bound workload. This set tries
   to fix the issue by reducing the risk of multiplication overflow in the
   cputime scaling code. "

Stanislaw Gruszka further explained the historic context and impact of the
bug:

 " Commit 0cf55e1ec08bb5a22e068309e2d8ba1180ab4239 start to use scalling
   for whole thread group, so increase chances of hitting multiplication
   overflow, depending on how many CPUs are on the system.

   We have multiplication utime * rtime for one thread since commit
   b27f03d4bdc145a09fb7b0c0e004b29f1ee555fa.

   Overflow will happen after:

   rtime * utime > 0xffffffffffffffff jiffies

   if thread utilize 100% of CPU time, that gives:

   rtime > sqrt(0xffffffffffffffff) jiffies

   ritme > sqrt(0xffffffffffffffff) / (24 * 60 * 60 * HZ) days

   For HZ 100 it will be 497 days for HZ 1000 it will be 49 days.

   Bug affect only users, who run CPU intensive application for that
   long period. Also they have to be interested on utime,stime values,
   as bug has no other visible effect as making those values incorrect. "

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 34 insertions, 12 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
index 024fe19..699d597 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
@@ -521,18 +521,36 @@ void account_idle_ticks(unsigned long ticks)
 	account_idle_time(jiffies_to_cputime(ticks));
 }
 
-static cputime_t scale_stime(cputime_t stime, cputime_t rtime, cputime_t total)
+/*
+ * Perform (stime * rtime) / total with reduced chances
+ * of multiplication overflows by using smaller factors
+ * like quotient and remainders of divisions between
+ * rtime and total.
+ */
+static cputime_t scale_stime(u64 stime, u64 rtime, u64 total)
 {
-	u64 temp = (__force u64) rtime;
+	u64 rem, res, scaled;
 
-	temp *= (__force u64) stime;
-
-	if (sizeof(cputime_t) == 4)
-		temp = div_u64(temp, (__force u32) total);
-	else
-		temp = div64_u64(temp, (__force u64) total);
+	if (rtime >= total) {
+		/*
+		 * Scale up to rtime / total then add
+		 * the remainder scaled to stime / total.
+		 */
+		res = div64_u64_rem(rtime, total, &rem);
+		scaled = stime * res;
+		scaled += div64_u64(stime * rem, total);
+	} else {
+		/*
+		 * Same in reverse: scale down to total / rtime
+		 * then substract that result scaled to
+		 * to the remaining part.
+		 */
+		res = div64_u64_rem(total, rtime, &rem);
+		scaled = div64_u64(stime, res);
+		scaled -= div64_u64(scaled * rem, total);
+	}
 
-	return (__force cputime_t) temp;
+	return (__force cputime_t) scaled;
 }
 
 /*
@@ -566,10 +584,14 @@ static void cputime_adjust(struct task_cputime *curr,
 	 */
 	rtime = nsecs_to_cputime(curr->sum_exec_runtime);
 
-	if (total)
-		stime = scale_stime(stime, rtime, total);
-	else
+	if (!rtime) {
+		stime = 0;
+	} else if (!total) {
 		stime = rtime;
+	} else {
+		stime = scale_stime((__force u64)stime,
+				    (__force u64)rtime, (__force u64)total);
+	}
 
 	/*
 	 * If the tick based count grows faster than the scheduler one,