Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Description of problem:
I'm a member of the procps devel group and we're facing the following issue. It isn't easy to make it clear since we had to internally exchange many emails to avoid confusions.
With introduction of dynamic frequency scaling (cpu throttling) our procps statistics became distorted by the automatic CPU frequency changes (which usually happen several times per sampling interval and thus can't be reliably measured). The main problem lies in the /proc/stat counters. They represent time units (hundreths of seconds) "consumed" by the processes (or time units spent in the idle state) whilst we need to know how many work units (or cpu ticks) were consumed by the task to make the stats frequency independent. Time units can be reliably used in case of CPUs with fixed frequencies, but in case of dynamic frequency scaling these values become useless, because they can't reliably tell us how many reserves we actually have and thus they can't be used for monitoring platforms.
We'd like to know if it's easily possible to measure and export also work units. Maybe the time units are internally evaluated using the work units?
In order to explain the impact I've created a testing application producing a fixed amount of work units each second and then forced CPU to stay at the following fixed frequencies...
The procps results were:
f[GHz] load[%]
2.66 34
1.73 52
whilst in fact the real load is 34% in both cases, but this is distorted by the scaling and the load then looks higher.
The following table shows differences in /proc/stat counters between two subsequent samples (interval 1.0s)
Results (all 4 cores - first /proc/stat line):
f[GHz] user[] idle[] total[]
1.73 218 180 398
2.66 142 257 399
Results (first core - second /proc/stat line):
f[GHz] user[] idle[] total[]
1.73 55 43 98
2.66 37 63 100
We don't want to break a backward compatibility and thus we don't want to change behaviour or the current counters. We want an introduction of new counters which could be used for frequency independent statistics. Additionally, if You could export a theoretical maximum number of work units which can be processed by a CPU core running at it's maximum frequency, then it would be really great. Such value is constant and could be used for evaluation of the load in percentage. We encourage any reasonable unit prefixes to make the increments not too high and not too low. They could be eventually prescaled to always have any reasonable range.
Please, do not hesitate to ask if anything isn't clear.
Regards,
Jaromir.
Comment 2RHEL Program Management
2012-05-03 04:49:50 UTC
Since RHEL 6.3 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Comment 3RHEL Program Management
2012-07-10 06:37:58 UTC
This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Comment 4RHEL Program Management
2012-07-10 23:33:04 UTC
This request was erroneously removed from consideration in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4, which is currently under development. This request will be evaluated for inclusion in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4.
Comment 5RHEL Program Management
2012-12-14 07:09:54 UTC
This request was not resolved in time for the current release.
Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if still desired, for consideration in
the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.