From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: rt: Make RT capacity aware
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 19:03:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200203190259.bnly7hfp3wfiteof@e107158-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200203131203.20bf3fc3@oasis.local.home>
On 02/03/20 13:12, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:17:46 +0000
> Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I'm torn about pushing a task already on a big core to a little core if it says
> > it wants it (down migration).
>
> If the "down migration" happens to a process that is lower in priority,
> then that stays in line with the policy decisions of scheduling RT
> tasks. That is, higher priority task take precedence over lower
> priority tasks, even if that means "degrading" that lower priority task.
>
> For example, if a high priority task wakes up on a CPU that is running
> a lower priority task, and with the exception of that lower priority
> task being pinned, it will boot it off the CPU. Even if the lower
> priority task is pinned, it may still take over the CPU if it can't
> find another CPU.
Indeed this makes sense.
>
>
> > >
> > > 4. If a little core is returned, and we schedule an RT task that
> > > prefers big cores on it, we mark it overloaded.
> > >
> > > 5. An RT task on a big core schedules out. Start looking at the RT
> > > overloaded run queues.
> > >
> > > 6. See that there's an RT task on the little core, and migrate it over.
> >
> > I think the above should depend on the fitness of the cpu we currently run on.
> > I think we shouldn't down migrate, or at least investigate better down
> > migration makes more sense than keeping tasks running on the correct CPU where
> > they are.
>
> Note, this only happens when a big core CPU schedules. And if you do
> not have HAVE_RT_PUSH_IPI (which sends IPIs to overloaded CPUS and just
> schedules), then that "down migration" happens to an RT task that isn't
> even running.
In the light of strictly adhering to priority based scheduling; yes this makes
sense. Though I still think the migration will produce worse performance, but
I can appreciate even if that was true it breaks the strict priority rule.
>
> You can add to the logic that you do not take over an RT task that is
> pinned and can't move itself. Perhaps that may be the only change to
I get this.
> cpu_find(), is that it will only pick a big CPU if little CPUs are
> available if the big CPU doesn't have a pinned RT task on it.
But not that. Do you mind rephrasing it?
Or let me try first:
1. Search all priority levels for a fitting CPU
2. If failed, return the first lowest mask found
3. If it succeeds, remove any CPU that has a pinned task in it
4. If the lowest_mask is empty, return (2).
5. Else return the lowest_mask with the fitting CPU(s)
Did I get it right?
The idea is not to potentially overload that CPU when this pinned task wakes
up? The task could be sleeping waiting for something interesting to poke it..?
>
> Like you said, this is best effort, and I believe this is the best
> approach. The policy has always been the higher the priority of a task,
> the more likely it will push other tasks away. We don't change that. If
> the system administrator is overloading the big cores with RT tasks,
> then this is what they get.
Yes. I think that has always been the case with RT. It is very easy to shoot
yourself in the foot.
>
> >
> > > Note, this will require a bit more logic as the overloaded code wasn't
> > > designed for migration of running tasks, but that could be added.
> >
> > I'm wary of overloading the meaning of rt.overloaded. Maybe I can convert it to
> > a bitmap so that we can encode the reason.
>
> We can change the name to something like rt.needs_pull or whatever.
Thanks for bringing more clarity to this.
Cheers
--
Qais Yousef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-03 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-09 10:46 [PATCH v2] sched: rt: Make RT capacity aware Qais Yousef
2019-10-23 12:34 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-28 14:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-28 18:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-10-28 20:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-20 16:01 ` Qais Yousef
2019-12-20 17:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-20 17:36 ` Qais Yousef
2019-11-07 9:15 ` Qais Yousef
2019-11-18 15:43 ` Qais Yousef
2019-11-18 15:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-18 16:12 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-29 8:13 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-29 11:02 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-29 11:17 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-29 11:48 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-29 12:20 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-29 12:46 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-29 12:54 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-29 13:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-29 20:36 ` Patrick Bellasi
2019-10-30 8:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-10-30 9:26 ` Qais Yousef
2019-10-30 12:11 ` Quentin Perret
2019-10-30 11:57 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-10-30 17:43 ` Qais Yousef
2019-11-28 13:59 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-11-25 21:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-26 9:39 ` Qais Yousef
2019-12-25 10:38 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/rt: Make RT capacity-aware tip-bot2 for Qais Yousef
2020-01-31 10:06 ` [PATCH v2] sched: rt: Make RT capacity aware Pavan Kondeti
2020-01-31 15:34 ` Qais Yousef
[not found] ` <CAEU1=PnYryM26F-tNAT0JVUoFcygRgE374JiBeJPQeTEoZpANg@mail.gmail.com>
2020-02-03 5:32 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-02-03 14:57 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-03 14:27 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-03 16:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-03 17:15 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-02-03 17:17 ` Qais Yousef
2020-02-03 18:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-02-03 19:03 ` Qais Yousef [this message]
2020-02-04 17:23 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-02-05 14:48 ` Qais Yousef
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=20200203190259.bnly7hfp3wfiteof@e107158-lin \
--to=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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 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).