LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>,
	Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fs <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/uclamp: Add a new sysctl to control RT default boost value
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:32:04 +0100
Message-ID: <20200605113204.srskjrunz2ezkcuj@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <875zc60ww2.derkling@matbug.net>

On 06/05/20 09:55, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> 
> Hi Qais,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 18:52:00 +0200, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com> wrote...
> 
> > On 06/03/20 16:59, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >> When I want to stress the fast path i usually use "perf bench sched pipe -T "
> >> The tip/sched/core on my arm octo core gives the following results for
> >> 20 iterations of perf bench sched pipe -T -l 50000
> >> 
> >> all uclamp config disabled  50035.4(+/- 0.334%)
> >> all uclamp config enabled  48749.8(+/- 0.339%)   -2.64%
> 
> I use to run the same test but I don't remember such big numbers :/

Yeah I remember you ran a lot of testing on this.

> 
> >> It's quite easy to reproduce and probably easier to study the impact
> >
> > Thanks Vincent. This is very useful!
> >
> > I could reproduce that on my Juno.
> >
> > One of the codepath I was suspecting seems to affect it.
> >
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index 0464569f26a7..9f48090eb926 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -1063,10 +1063,12 @@ static inline void uclamp_rq_dec_id(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,
> >          * e.g. due to future modification, warn and fixup the expected value.
> >          */
> >         SCHED_WARN_ON(bucket->value > rq_clamp);
> > +#if 0
> >         if (bucket->value >= rq_clamp) {
> >                 bkt_clamp = uclamp_rq_max_value(rq, clamp_id, uc_se->value);
> >                 WRITE_ONCE(uc_rq->value, bkt_clamp);
> >         }
> > +#endif
> 
> Yep, that's likely where we have most of the overhead at dequeue time,
> sine _sometimes_ we need to update the cpu's clamp value.
> 
> However, while running perf sched pipe, I expect:
>  - all tasks to have the same clamp value
>  - all CPUs to have _always_ at least one RUNNABLE task
> 
> Given these two conditions above, if the CPU is never "CFS idle" (i.e.
> without RUNNABLE CFS tasks), the code above should never be triggered.
> More on that later...

So the cost is only incurred by idle cpus is what you're saying.

> 
> >  }
> >
> >  static inline void uclamp_rq_inc(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> >
> >
> >
> > uclamp_rq_max_value() could be expensive as it loops over all buckets.
> 
> It loops over UCLAMP_CNT values which are defined to fit into a single

I think you meant to say UCLAMP_BUCKETS which is defined 5 by default.

> $L. That was the optimal space/time complexity compromise we found to
> get the MAX of a set of values.

It actually covers two cachelines, see below and my other email to Mel.

> 
> > Commenting this whole path out strangely doesn't just 'fix' it,
> > but produces  better results to no-uclamp kernel :-/
> >
> > # ./perf bench -r 20 sched pipe -T -l 50000
> > Without uclamp:		5039
> > With uclamp:		4832
> > With uclamp+patch:	5729
> 
> I explain it below: with that code removed you never decrease the CPU's
> uclamp value. Thus, the first time you schedule an RT task you go to MAX
> OPP and stay there forever.

Okay.

> 
> > It might be because schedutil gets biased differently by uclamp..? If I move to
> > performance governor these numbers almost double.
> >
> > I don't know. But this promoted me to look closer and
> 
> Just to resume, when a task is dequeued we can have only these cases:
> 
> - uclamp(task) < uclamp(cpu):
>   this happens when the task was co-scheduled with other tasks with
>   higher clamp values which are still RUNNABLE.
>   In this case there are no uclamp(cpu) updates.
> 
> - uclamp(task) == uclamp(cpu):
>   this happens when the task was one of the tasks defining the current
>   uclamp(cpu) value, which is defined to track the MAX of the RUNNABLE
>   tasks clamp values.
> 
> In this last case we _not_ always need to do a uclamp(cpu) update.
> Indeed the update is required _only_ when that task was _the last_ task
> defining the current uclamp(cpu) value.
> 
> In this case we use uclamp_rq_max_value() to do a linear scan of
> UCLAMP_CNT values which fits into a single cache line.

Again, I think you mean UCLAMP_BUCKETS here. Unless I missed something, they
span 2 cahcelines on 64bit machines and 64b cacheline size.

To be specific, I am referring to struct uclamp_rq, which defines an array of
size UCLAMP_BUCKETS of type struct uclamp_bucket.

uclamp_rq_max_value() scans the buckets for a given clamp_id (UCLAMP_MIN or
UCLAMP_MAX).

So sizeof(struct uclamp_rq) = 8 * 5 + 4 = 44; on 64bit machines.

And actually the compiler introduces a 4 bytes hole, so we end up with a total
of 48 bytes.

In struct rq, we define struct uclamp_rq as an array of UCLAMP_CNT which is 2.

So by default we have 2 * sizeof(struct uclamp_rq) = 96 bytes.

> 
> > I think I spotted a bug where in the if condition we check for '>='
> > instead of '>', causing us to take the supposedly impossible fail safe
> > path.
> 
> The fail safe path is when the '>' condition matches, which is what the
> SCHED_WARN_ON tell us. Indeed, we never expect uclamp(cpu) to be bigger
> than one of its RUNNABLE tasks. If that should happen we WARN and fix
> the cpu clamp value for the best.
> 
> The normal path is instead '=' and, according to by previous resume,
> it's expected to be executed _only_ when we dequeue the last task of the
> clamp group defining the current uclamp(cpu) value.

Okay. I was mislead by the comment then. Thanks for clarifying.

Can this function be broken down to deal with '=' separately from the '>' case?

IIUC, for the common '=', we always want to return uclamp_idle_value() hence
skip the potentially expensive scan?

Anyway, based on Vincent results, it doesn't seem this path is an issue for him
and the real problem is lurking somewhere else.

> 
> > Mind trying with the below patch please?
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > index 0464569f26a7..50d66d4016ff 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -1063,7 +1063,7 @@ static inline void uclamp_rq_dec_id(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p,
> >          * e.g. due to future modification, warn and fixup the expected value.
> >          */
> >         SCHED_WARN_ON(bucket->value > rq_clamp);
> > -       if (bucket->value >= rq_clamp) {
> > +       if (bucket->value > rq_clamp) {
> >                 bkt_clamp = uclamp_rq_max_value(rq, clamp_id, uc_se->value);
> >                 WRITE_ONCE(uc_rq->value, bkt_clamp);
> >         }
> 
> This patch is thus bogus, since we never expect to have uclamp(cpu)
> bigger than uclamp(task) and thus we will never reset the clamp value of
> a cpu.

Yeah I got confused by SCHED_WARN_ON() and the comment. Thanks for clarifying.

Cheers

--
Qais Yousef

  reply index

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-11 15:40 Qais Yousef
2020-05-11 15:40 ` [PATCH 2/2] Documentation/sysctl: Document uclamp sysctl knobs Qais Yousef
2020-05-11 17:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/uclamp: Add a new sysctl to control RT default boost value Qais Yousef
2020-05-12  2:10 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-05-12 11:46   ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-15 11:08 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-05-18  8:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-18 16:49   ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-28 13:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-28 15:58   ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-28 16:11     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-28 16:51       ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-28 18:29         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-28 19:08           ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-05-28 19:20           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-29  9:11           ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-29 10:21         ` Mel Gorman
2020-05-29 15:11           ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-29 16:02             ` Mel Gorman
2020-05-29 16:05               ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-29 10:08       ` Mel Gorman
2020-05-29 16:04         ` Qais Yousef
2020-05-29 16:57           ` Mel Gorman
2020-06-02 16:46         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-06-03  8:29           ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-03 10:10             ` Mel Gorman
2020-06-03 14:59               ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-03 16:52                 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-04 12:14                   ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-05 10:45                     ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-09 15:29                       ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-08 12:31                     ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-08 13:06                       ` Valentin Schneider
2020-06-08 14:44                       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-06-11 10:13                         ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-09 17:10                       ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-11 10:24                         ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-11 12:01                           ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-23 15:44                             ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-24  8:45                               ` Vincent Guittot
2020-06-05  7:55                   ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-05 11:32                     ` Qais Yousef [this message]
2020-06-05 13:27                       ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-03  9:40           ` Mel Gorman
2020-06-03 12:41             ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-04 13:40               ` Mel Gorman
2020-06-05 10:58                 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-11 10:58                 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-16 11:08                   ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-16 13:56                     ` Lukasz Luba
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-04-03 12:30 Qais Yousef
2020-04-14 18:21 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-04-15  7:46   ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-04-20 15:04     ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-20  8:24   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-20 15:19     ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-21  0:52       ` Steven Rostedt
2020-04-21 11:16         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-21 11:23           ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-20 14:50   ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-15 10:11 ` Quentin Perret
2020-04-20 15:08   ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-20  8:29 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-20 15:13   ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-21 11:18     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-21 11:27       ` Qais Yousef
2020-04-22 10:59         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-22 13:13           ` 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=20200605113204.srskjrunz2ezkcuj@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=yzaikin@google.com \
    /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

LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0 lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1 lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2 lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3 lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4 lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5 lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6 lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7 lkml/git/7.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8 lkml/git/8.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/9 lkml/git/9.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml \
		linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index lkml

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git