From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 10:19:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1444292390.3389.100.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1444099557.2832.48.camel@gmail.com>
On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 04:45 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 08:48 +1100, paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au wrote:
> > The Linux CFS scheduler prefers pinned tasks and unfairly
> > gives more CPU time to tasks that have set CPU affinity.
> > This effect is observed with or without CGROUP controls.
> >
> > To demonstrate: on an otherwise idle machine, as some user
> > run several processes pinned to each CPU, one for each CPU
> > (as many as CPUs present in the system) e.g. for a quad-core
> > non-HyperThreaded machine:
> >
> > taskset -c 0 perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> > taskset -c 1 perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> > taskset -c 2 perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> > taskset -c 3 perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> >
> > and (as that same or some other user) run some without
> > pinning:
> >
> > perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> > perl -e 'while(1){1}' &
> >
> > and use e.g. top to observe that the pinned processes get
> > more CPU time than "fair".
I see a fairness issue with pinned tasks and group scheduling, but one
opposite to your complaint.
Two task groups, one with 8 hogs (oink), one with 1 (pert), all are pinned.
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ P COMMAND
3269 root 20 0 4060 724 648 R 100.0 0.004 1:00.02 1 oink
3270 root 20 0 4060 652 576 R 100.0 0.004 0:59.84 2 oink
3271 root 20 0 4060 692 616 R 100.0 0.004 0:59.95 3 oink
3274 root 20 0 4060 608 532 R 100.0 0.004 1:00.01 6 oink
3273 root 20 0 4060 728 652 R 99.90 0.005 0:59.98 5 oink
3272 root 20 0 4060 644 568 R 99.51 0.004 0:59.80 4 oink
3268 root 20 0 4060 612 536 R 99.41 0.004 0:59.67 0 oink
3279 root 20 0 8312 804 708 R 88.83 0.005 0:53.06 7 pert
3275 root 20 0 4060 656 580 R 11.07 0.004 0:06.98 7 oink
.
That group share math would make a huge compute group with progress
checkpoints sharing an SGI monster with one other hog amusing to watch.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-08 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-05 21:48 CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks paul.szabo
2015-10-06 2:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-06 10:06 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-06 12:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-06 20:44 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-07 1:28 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-08 8:19 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2015-10-08 10:54 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-08 11:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-10 13:22 ` [patch] sched: disable task group re-weighting on the desktop Mike Galbraith
2015-10-10 14:03 ` kbuild test robot
2015-10-10 14:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-10 17:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-10 17:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-11 2:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-11 17:42 ` 4.3 group scheduling regression Mike Galbraith
2015-10-12 7:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-12 7:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-12 8:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-12 0:53 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-12 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-12 2:12 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-12 10:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-12 19:55 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-13 4:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-12 20:42 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-13 8:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-13 0:35 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-13 8:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-13 0:37 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-12 11:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-12 19:32 ` Yuyang Du
2015-10-13 8:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-10-13 2:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-12 8:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-10 20:14 ` [patch] sched: disable task group re-weighting on the desktop paul.szabo
2015-10-11 2:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-11 9:25 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-11 12:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-11 19:46 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-12 1:59 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-08 14:25 ` CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks Mike Galbraith
2015-10-08 21:55 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-09 1:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-09 2:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-10-11 9:43 ` paul.szabo
2015-10-10 3:59 ` Wanpeng Li
2015-10-10 7:58 ` Wanpeng Li
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-10-11 20:59 paul.szabo
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=1444292390.3389.100.camel@gmail.com \
--to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.