All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Fix SCHED_HRTICK bug leading to late preemption of tasks
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:28:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1474075731-11550-1-git-send-email-joonwoop@codeaurora.org> (raw)

From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>

SCHED_HRTICK feature is useful to preempt SCHED_FAIR tasks on-the-dot
(just when they would have exceeded their ideal_runtime). It makes use
of a per-cpu hrtimer resource and hence alarming that hrtimer should
be based on total SCHED_FAIR tasks a cpu has across its various cfs_rqs,
rather than being based on number of tasks in a particular cfs_rq (as
implemented currently). As a result, with current code, its possible for
a running task (which is the sole task in its cfs_rq) to be preempted
much after its ideal_runtime has elapsed, resulting in increased latency
for tasks in other cfs_rq on same cpu.

Fix this by alarming sched hrtimer based on total number of SCHED_FAIR
tasks a CPU has across its various cfs_rqs.

Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
---

 joonwoop: Do we also need to update or remove if-statement inside
 hrtick_update()?
 I guess not because hrtick_update() doesn't want to start hrtick when cfs_rq
 has large number of nr_running where slice is longer than sched_latency.

 kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 4088eed..c55c566 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4458,7 +4458,7 @@ static void hrtick_start_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
 
 	WARN_ON(task_rq(p) != rq);
 
-	if (cfs_rq->nr_running > 1) {
+	if (rq->cfs.h_nr_running > 1) {
 		u64 slice = sched_slice(cfs_rq, se);
 		u64 ran = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime;
 		s64 delta = slice - ran;
-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

             reply	other threads:[~2016-09-17  1:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-17  1:28 Joonwoo Park [this message]
2016-09-17 23:28 ` [PATCH] sched: Fix SCHED_HRTICK bug leading to late preemption of tasks Wanpeng Li
2016-09-19 18:08   ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-19 23:30     ` Wanpeng Li
2016-09-19  8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-19 18:04   ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-19 18:17     ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-22 14:01 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: " tip-bot for Srivatsa Vaddagiri

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=1474075731-11550-1-git-send-email-joonwoop@codeaurora.org \
    --to=joonwoop@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vatsa@codeaurora.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.