From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Walter Mack <walter.mack@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Simple runqueue order on migrate
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:54:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f59f1dfeec4692e7a373cc810168912a2d2f8f3c.1648228023.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1648228023.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
From: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
From: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
There's a number of problems with SMP migration of fair tasks, but
basically it boils down to a task not receiving equal service on each
runqueue (consider the trivial 3 tasks 2 cpus infeasible weight
scenario).
Fully solving that with vruntime placement is 'hard', not least
because a task might be very under-services on a busy runqueue and
would need to be placed so far left on the new runqueue that it would
significantly impact latency on the existing tasks.
Instead do minimal / basic placement instead; when moving to a less
busy queue place at the front of the queue to receive time sooner.
When moving to a busier queue, place at the end of the queue to
receive time later.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Tested-by: Walter Mack <walter.mack@intel.com>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
kernel/sched/features.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 2498e97804fd..c5d2cb3a8f42 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4223,6 +4223,27 @@ place_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int initial)
se->vruntime = max_vruntime(se->vruntime, vruntime);
}
+static void place_entity_migrate(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
+{
+ if (!sched_feat(PLACE_MIGRATE))
+ return;
+
+ if (cfs_rq->nr_running < se->migrated) {
+ /*
+ * Migrated to a shorter runqueue, go first because
+ * we were under-served on the old runqueue.
+ */
+ se->vruntime = cfs_rq->min_vruntime;
+ return;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * Migrated to a longer runqueue, go last because
+ * we got over-served on the old runqueue.
+ */
+ se->vruntime = cfs_rq->min_vruntime + sched_vslice(cfs_rq, se);
+}
+
static void check_enqueue_throttle(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq);
static inline bool cfs_bandwidth_used(void);
@@ -4296,6 +4317,8 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)
place_entity(cfs_rq, se, 0);
+ else if (se->migrated)
+ place_entity_migrate(cfs_rq, se);
check_schedstat_required();
update_stats_enqueue_fair(cfs_rq, se, flags);
@@ -6930,6 +6953,7 @@ static void detach_entity_cfs_rq(struct sched_entity *se);
*/
static void migrate_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int new_cpu)
{
+ struct sched_entity *se = &p->se;
/*
* As blocked tasks retain absolute vruntime the migration needs to
* deal with this by subtracting the old and adding the new
@@ -6962,7 +6986,7 @@ static void migrate_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int new_cpu)
* rq->lock and can modify state directly.
*/
lockdep_assert_rq_held(task_rq(p));
- detach_entity_cfs_rq(&p->se);
+ detach_entity_cfs_rq(se);
} else {
/*
@@ -6973,14 +6997,15 @@ static void migrate_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int new_cpu)
* wakee task is less decayed, but giving the wakee more load
* sounds not bad.
*/
- remove_entity_load_avg(&p->se);
+ remove_entity_load_avg(se);
}
/* Tell new CPU we are migrated */
- p->se.avg.last_update_time = 0;
+ se->avg.last_update_time = 0;
/* We have migrated, no longer consider this task hot */
- p->se.migrated = 1;
+ for_each_sched_entity(se)
+ se->migrated = READ_ONCE(cfs_rq_of(se)->nr_running) + !se->on_rq;
update_scan_period(p, new_cpu);
}
diff --git a/kernel/sched/features.h b/kernel/sched/features.h
index 1cf435bbcd9c..681c84fd062c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/features.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/features.h
@@ -100,3 +100,5 @@ SCHED_FEAT(LATENCY_WARN, false)
SCHED_FEAT(ALT_PERIOD, true)
SCHED_FEAT(BASE_SLICE, true)
+
+SCHED_FEAT(PLACE_MIGRATE, true)
--
2.32.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-25 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-25 22:54 [PATCH 0/2] sched/fair: Fix starvation caused by task migration Tim Chen
2022-03-25 22:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Don't rely on ->exec_start for migration Tim Chen
2022-03-25 22:54 ` Tim Chen [this message]
2022-03-29 9:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Simple runqueue order on migrate Vincent Guittot
2022-03-31 11:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-03-31 12:15 ` Vincent Guittot
2022-03-29 10:09 ` Abel Wu
2022-03-29 14:26 ` Tim Chen
2022-03-30 9:46 ` [sched/fair] ddb3b1126f: hackbench.throughput -25.9% regression kernel test robot
2022-03-30 23:48 ` Tim Chen
2022-04-01 18:04 ` Chen Yu
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=f59f1dfeec4692e7a373cc810168912a2d2f8f3c.1648228023.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=walter.mack@intel.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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).