All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: sched: per-entity load-tracking
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:36:24 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPM31R+PALEsrHQjALK-NqQrkv8uYwnyJCKF_ceoMk8cjg_MLQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Argh, regenerated mbox and forgot to fix the subject.

This should have been: sched: per-entity load-tracking.

I won't bother re-posting, but if you find yourself reading this
email; look to the much more interesting "Series short description".

Thanks,

- Paul

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please find attached the latest version for CFS load-tracking.
>
> It implements load-tracking on a per-sched_entity (currently SCHED_NORMAL, but
> could be extended to RT as well) basis. This results in a bottom-up
> load-computation in which entities contribute to their parents' load, as
> opposed to the current top-down where the parent averages its children.  In
> particular this allows us to correctly migrate load with their accompanying
> entities and provides the necessary inputs for intelligent load-balancing and
> power-management.
>
> Modulo review I think this is now close to a mergable state.
>
> Notable updates:
> ----------------
> - Few stability issues fixed; in particular on systems with tasks having idle
>  periods spanning several days.  Minor code cleanups.
> - 32 bit performance improved (now reported faster[*] on 32-bit ARM than
>  without, presumably due to better load-balance or reduced overhead.  Thanks
>  to Vincent Guittot and others for looking at this)
> - All configs delinted
> - Config dependencies seperated so that load-tracking can be used without
>  FAIR_GROUP_SCHED so that we may generally use it for power governors and
>  per-entity load-balance (in progress).
>
> Thanks to Peter, Vincent, Morten, Nikunj, and others for testing and comments.
>
> Rewinding some context since I've been buried with internal work and it's been
> a while since my last posting:
>
> Background:
> ----------
> We currently track the load average at the parenting cfs_rq level. We divide
> execution into a series of consecutive "windows, w_i".  Within each we track:
>  \Sum load_i * t_i where \Sum t_i = w and each load_i a disjoint load level.
>
> The load average is then \Sum w_j / 2^n.
>
> This this works reasonably well but there's a few problems
> 1) Since decay occurs at boundary window boundary there are 'skews':
> At a window boundary the 'foreground' time has a bias against the
> time immediately preceding it (as a result of the folding division)
> e.g.  __xx_|_yyyy___ vs __xx_yyyy_|___  (where '|' is a window boundary).
>
> The accounting here is 2x + 4y/2 or 2x + 4y, depending on which side of the
> window your load lands on.
>
> 2) Everything within a window 'w' is accounted equally, we only fold at
> the boundaries.  This actually means you can't set 'w' large enough to
> really have meaningful coverage of the sched period without throwing
> decay out the window.  But then with w/2 << sched_period (currently
> w/2=5ms) the average ends up having fairly drastic swings even with
> stable loads.
>
> (Note:  Before we even looked at migrating to per-entity tracking we evaluating
> foreground window into the considered average until it was "complete", this
> represented a measurable improvement in stability under predictable load.)
>
> 3) Since the load sum average is per-cfs_rq and not per-entity when a task
> entity migrates we lose its contribution to load-sum and effectively double
> count it while it former sum decays.
>
> New approach:
> -------------
> Instead of tracking load on a per-cfs_rq basis we do it on a per-sched_entity
> basis.  The load sum for a cfs_rq is then just the sum of its childrens' load
> averages.  The obvious immediately nice property is that when we migrate thread
> A from cpu1-->cpu2, we carry its load with it; leaving the global load sum
> unmodified.
>
> The 'windows' above are replaced with more fine-grained tracking, that is (for
> an entity j):
>
> runnable_j = u_i * y^i , load_avg_j = runnable_j * weight_j [*]
>
> Where: u_i is the usage in the last i`th ~ms and y is chosen such that
> y^~sched_period = 1/2 (we currently choose k=32).This means that load tracked 1
> sched_period ago contributes about ~50% as current execution.
>
> Now, the real challenge in tracking at an entity basis is handling blocked
> entities.  Obviously runnable entities will be updated naturally as we iterate
> through them but there could be O(many) blocked entities so we can't afford to
> iterate through them and update their tracking.
>
> That our decay for a unit period is exponential introduces a particularly nice
> property here:
> We can separate the contributed load on a cfs_rq into blocked and runnable.
> Runnable load is just the sum of all load_avg_j above, maintained by the
> entities themselves as they run and self update (when they update their
> load_avg they update the cumulative sum also).
>
> Blocked load then looks like:
>  load_avg_j = weight_k * \Sum u[k]_n * y^n
>
> To account an entirely idle period we then only need to multiply by y.
>
> This ends up being orders of magnitude more accurate than the current
> tracking schema, even with the old shares_window massively dilated to
> better capture a stable load-state.  It's also obviously stable under
> migration.
>
> As referenced above this also allows us to potentially improve decisions within
> the load-balancer, for both distribution and power-management.
>
> Example: consider 1x80% task  and 2x40% tasks on a 2-core machine.  It's
> currently a bit of a gamble as to whether you get an {AB, B} or {A, BB} split
> since they have equal weight (assume 1024).  With per-task tracking we can
> actually consider them at their contributed weight and see a stable ~{800,{400,
> 400}} load-split.  Likewise within balance_tasks we can consider the load
> migrated to be that actually contributed.  We have some patches looking at this
> and will post them as they mature.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Paul
>
> ---
>
> Ben Segall (1):
>      sched: maintain per-rq runnable averages
>
> Paul Turner (15):
>      sched: track the runnable average on a per-task entitiy basis
>      sched: aggregate load contributed by task entities on parenting cfs_rq
>      sched: maintain the load contribution of blocked entities
>      sched: add an rq migration call-back to sched_class
>      sched: account for blocked load waking back up
>      sched: aggregate total task_group load
>      sched: compute load contribution by a group entity
>      sched: normalize tg load contributions against runnable time
>      sched: maintain runnable averages across throttled periods
>      sched: replace update_shares weight distribution with per-entity computation
>      sched: refactor update_shares_cpu() -> update_blocked_avgs()
>      sched: update_cfs_shares at period edge
>      sched: make __update_entity_runnable_avg() fast
>      sched: implement usage tracking
>      sched: introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for load-tracking
>
>
>  include/linux/sched.h |   18 +
>  kernel/sched/core.c   |    5
>  kernel/sched/debug.c  |   39 ++
>  kernel/sched/fair.c   |  793 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  kernel/sched/sched.h  |   60 ++--
>  5 files changed, 720 insertions(+), 195 deletions(-)
>
> --
> Signature
>

             reply	other threads:[~2012-06-28  3:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-28  3:36 Paul Turner [this message]
2012-09-21 20:52 sched: per-entity load-tracking Paul Turner
2012-10-06  3:27 ` Paul Turner
2012-10-06  7:39   ` Ingo Molnar
2012-10-08 12:14     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-09 18:29       ` Paul Turner
2012-10-09 18:35     ` Paul Turner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAPM31R+PALEsrHQjALK-NqQrkv8uYwnyJCKF_ceoMk8cjg_MLQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.