From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Wei Wang <wvw@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
Alessio Balsini <balsini@google.com>,
Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] sched/deadline: Add dl_bw_capacity()
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 17:09:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d07a0517-b1bf-0879-575b-7933063c7597@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200506123738.GJ17381@localhost.localdomain>
On 06/05/2020 14:37, Juri Lelli wrote:
> On 06/05/20 12:54, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 27/04/2020 10:37, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
[...]
>> There is an issue w/ excl. cpusets and cpuset.sched_load_balance=0. The
>> latter is needed to demonstrate the problem since DL task affinity can't
>> be altered.
>>
>> A CPU in such a cpuset has its rq attached to def_root_domain which does
>> not have its 'sum_cpu_capacity' properly set.
>
> Hummm, but if sched_load_balance is disabled it means that we've now got
> a subset of CPUs which (from a DL AC pow) are partitioned. So, I'd tend
Yes, the CPUs of the cpuset w/ cpuset.sched_load_balance=0 (cpuset B in
the example).
> to say that we actually want to check new tasks bw requirement against
> the available bandwidth of the particular CPU they happen to be running
> (and will continue to run) when setscheduler is called.
By 'available bandwidth of the particular CPU' you refer to
'\Sum_{cpu_rq(i)->rd->span} CPU capacity', right?
This is what this fix tries to achieve. Regardless whether cpu_rq(i)->rd
is a 'real' rd or the def_root_domain, dl_bw_capacity() will now always
return '\Sum_{cpu_rq(i)->rd->span} CPU capacity'
> If then load balance is enabled again, AC check we did above should
> still be valid for all tasks admitted in the meantime, no?
Example (w/ this fix) on Juno [L b b L L L], capacity_orig_of(L)=446 :
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/A
echo 0 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/A/cpuset.mems
echo 1 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/A/cpuset.cpu_exclusive
echo 0-2 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/A/cpuset.cpus
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B
echo 0 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/cpuset.mems
echo 1 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/cpuset.cpu_exclusive
echo 3-5 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/cpuset.cpus
echo 0 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/cpuset.sched_load_balance
echo 0 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/cpuset.sched_load_balance
echo $$ > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/tasks
chrt -d --sched-runtime 8000 --sched-period 16000 -p 0 $$
...
[ 144.920102] __dl_bw_capacity CPU3 rd->span=3-5 return 1338
[ 144.925607] sched_dl_overflow: [bash 1999] task_cpu(p)=3 cap=1338 cpus_ptr=3-5
[ 144.932841] __dl_bw_capacity CPU3 rd->span=3-5 return 1338
...
echo 1 > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/cpuset.sched_load_balance
echo $$ > /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/B/tasks
chrt -d --sched-runtime 8000 --sched-period 16000 -p 0 $$
...
[ 254.367982] __dl_bw_capacity CPU5 rd->span=3-5 return 1338
[ 254.373487] sched_dl_overflow: [bash 2052] task_cpu(p)=5 cap=1338 cpus_ptr=3-5
[ 254.380721] __dl_bw_capacity CPU5 rd->span=3-5 return 1338
...
Regardless of 'B/cpuset.sched_load_balance'
'\Sum_{cpu_rq(i)->rd->span} CPU capacity' stays 1338 (3*446)
So IMHO, DL AC check stays intact.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-06 15:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-27 8:37 [PATCH v2 0/6] Capacity awareness for SCHED_DEADLINE Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] sched/topology: Store root domain CPU capacity sum Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] sched/deadline: Optimize dl_bw_cpus() Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-30 10:55 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-05-01 16:12 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] sched/deadline: Add dl_bw_capacity() Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-06 10:54 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-06 12:37 ` Juri Lelli
2020-05-06 15:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2020-05-11 8:01 ` Juri Lelli
2020-05-12 12:39 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-15 12:26 ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] sched/deadline: Improve admission control for asymmetric CPU capacities Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] sched/deadline: Make DL capacity-aware Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-30 13:10 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-05-01 16:12 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-05-04 3:58 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-05-05 18:02 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 8:37 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] sched/deadline: Implement fallback mechanism for !fit case Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-27 13:34 ` Juri Lelli
2020-04-27 14:17 ` luca abeni
2020-04-29 17:39 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2020-04-30 11:00 ` Pavan Kondeti
2020-05-01 16:12 ` Dietmar Eggemann
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=d07a0517-b1bf-0879-575b-7933063c7597@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=balsini@google.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=wvw@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
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).