linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
	Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add CPU's clamp buckets refcounting
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 12:43:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190314124311.f6azk66rnwk4p6zx@e110439-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpHNgSOR_ZujZ4XFS2sqGUaJKPOYoc8aqToO=qxA2LhBag@mail.gmail.com>

On 13-Mar 14:23, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 6:52 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:05:40AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * When a task is enqueued on a rq, the clamp bucket currently defined by the
> > > + * task's uclamp::bucket_id is reference counted on that rq. This also
> > > + * immediately updates the rq's clamp value if required.
> > > + *
> > > + * Since tasks know their specific value requested from user-space, we track
> > > + * within each bucket the maximum value for tasks refcounted in that bucket.
> > > + * This provide a further aggregation (local clamping) which allows to track
> > > + * within each bucket the exact "requested" clamp value whenever all tasks
> > > + * RUNNABLE in that bucket require the same clamp.
> > > + */
> > > +static inline void uclamp_rq_inc_id(struct task_struct *p, struct rq *rq,
> > > +                                 unsigned int clamp_id)
> > > +{
> > > +     unsigned int bucket_id = p->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket_id;
> > > +     unsigned int rq_clamp, bkt_clamp, tsk_clamp;
> > > +
> > > +     rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].tasks++;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Local clamping: rq's buckets always track the max "requested"
> > > +      * clamp value from all RUNNABLE tasks in that bucket.
> > > +      */
> > > +     tsk_clamp = p->uclamp[clamp_id].value;
> > > +     bkt_clamp = rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].value;
> > > +     rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].value = max(bkt_clamp, tsk_clamp);
> >
> > So, if I read this correct:
> >
> >  - here we track a max value in a bucket,
> >
> > > +     rq_clamp = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[clamp_id].value);
> > > +     WRITE_ONCE(rq->uclamp[clamp_id].value, max(rq_clamp, tsk_clamp));
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * When a task is dequeued from a rq, the clamp bucket reference counted by
> > > + * the task is released. If this is the last task reference counting the rq's
> > > + * max active clamp value, then the rq's clamp value is updated.
> > > + * Both the tasks reference counter and the rq's cached clamp values are
> > > + * expected to be always valid, if we detect they are not we skip the updates,
> > > + * enforce a consistent state and warn.
> > > + */
> > > +static inline void uclamp_rq_dec_id(struct task_struct *p, struct rq *rq,
> > > +                                 unsigned int clamp_id)
> > > +{
> > > +     unsigned int bucket_id = p->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket_id;
> > > +     unsigned int rq_clamp, bkt_clamp;
> > > +
> > > +     SCHED_WARN_ON(!rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].tasks);
> > > +     if (likely(rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].tasks))
> > > +             rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].tasks--;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Keep "local clamping" simple and accept to (possibly) overboost
> > > +      * still RUNNABLE tasks in the same bucket.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (likely(rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].tasks))
> > > +             return;
> >
> > (Oh man, I hope that generates semi sane code; long live CSE passes I
> > suppose)
> >
> > But we never decrement that bkt_clamp value on dequeue.
> >
> > > +     bkt_clamp = rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].value;
> > > +
> > > +     /* The rq's clamp value is expected to always track the max */
> > > +     rq_clamp = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[clamp_id].value);
> > > +     SCHED_WARN_ON(bkt_clamp > rq_clamp);
> > > +     if (bkt_clamp >= rq_clamp) {
> >
> > head hurts, this reads ==, how can this ever not be so?
> >
> > > +             /*
> > > +              * Reset rq's clamp bucket value to its nominal value whenever
> > > +              * there are anymore RUNNABLE tasks refcounting it.
> >
> > -ENOPARSE
> >
> > > +              */
> > > +             rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].value =
> > > +                     uclamp_bucket_value(rq_clamp);
> >
> > But basically you decrement the bucket value to the nominal value.
> >
> > > +             uclamp_rq_update(rq, clamp_id);
> > > +     }
> > > +}
> >
> > Given all that, what is to stop the bucket value to climbing to
> > uclamp_bucket_value(+1)-1 and staying there (provided there's someone
> > runnable)?
> >
> > Why are we doing this... ?
> 
> I agree with Peter, this part of the patch was the hardest to read.
> SCHED_WARN_ON line makes sense to me. The condition that follows and
> the following comment are a little baffling. Condition seems to
> indicate that the code that follows should be executed only if we are
> in the top-most occupied bucket (the bucket which has tasks and has
> the highest uclamp value).
> So this bucket just lost its last task and we should update
> rq->uclamp[clamp_id].value.

Right.

> However that's not exactly what the code does... It also resets
> rq->uclamp[clamp_id].bucket[bucket_id].value.

Right...

> So if I understand correctly, unless the bucket that just lost its
> last task is the top-most one its value will not be reset to nominal
> value. That looks like a bug to me. Am I missing something?

... and I think you've got a point here!

The reset to nominal value line should be done unconditionally.
I'll move it outside its current block. Thanks for spotting it.

> Side note: some more explanation would be very helpful.

Will move that "bucket local max" management code into a separate
patch as suggested by Peter. Hopefully that should make the logic more
clear and allows me to add some notes in the changelog.

-- 
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-14 12:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-08 10:05 [PATCH v7 00/15] Add utilization clamping support Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 01/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add CPU's clamp buckets refcounting Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-12 12:52   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-03-13 15:15     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 21:01       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 14:54         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 15:00       ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-12 15:20   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-12 15:50     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13  8:19       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 11:37         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 13:40   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 16:12     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 17:22       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 18:22         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 19:48       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 12:13         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 13:32           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 15:07             ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 19:18               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 13:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 15:59     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 19:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 11:03         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 13:27           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 19:39       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 11:18         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 21:23     ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 12:43       ` Patrick Bellasi [this message]
2019-03-13 14:06   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 15:28     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 14:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 15:23     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 19:46       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 21:08         ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 12:22           ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 11:45         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 21:32   ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 14:46     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 15:29       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 15:40         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 16:39           ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 02/15] sched/core: uclamp: Enforce last task UCLAMP_MAX Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 14:10   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 16:20     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 17:29       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 18:29         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 14:12   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 16:16     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14  0:29       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-14 17:06         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 03/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add system default clamps Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 14:32   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 17:09     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 19:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 20:10       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-15 13:41         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 20:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-13 20:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-18 12:18     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-18 13:10       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-18 14:21         ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-18 14:29           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 04/15] sched/core: Allow sched_setattr() to use the current policy Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 05/15] sched/core: uclamp: Extend sched_setattr() to support utilization clamping Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 06/15] sched/core: uclamp: Reset uclamp values on RESET_ON_FORK Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-13 20:52   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-18 12:58     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 07/15] sched/core: uclamp: Set default clamps for RT tasks Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 08/15] sched/cpufreq: uclamp: Add clamps for FAIR and " Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 09/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add uclamp_util_with() Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 10/15] sched/fair: uclamp: Add uclamp support to energy_compute() Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-06 17:21   ` Quentin Perret
2019-03-18 15:19     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 11/15] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup controller Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-14 15:48   ` Tejun Heo
2019-03-19 10:00     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 12/15] sched/core: uclamp: Propagate parent clamps Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-14 16:17   ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-03-18 16:54     ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-03-18 16:58       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 13/15] sched/core: uclamp: Propagate system defaults to root group Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 14/15] sched/core: uclamp: Use TG's clamps to restrict TASK's clamps Patrick Bellasi
2019-02-08 10:05 ` [PATCH v7 15/15] sched/core: uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp changes Patrick Bellasi

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=20190314124311.f6azk66rnwk4p6zx@e110439-lin \
    --to=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=joelaf@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=smuckle@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=tkjos@google.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v7 01/15] sched/core: uclamp: Add CPU'\''s clamp buckets refcounting' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).