All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: luca abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 1/6] Track the active utilisation
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:29:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161109172927.21619bac@utopia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161108175635.GF16920@e106622-lin>

On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 17:56:35 +0000
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > > @@ -947,14 +965,19 @@ static void enqueue_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> > > >  		return;
> > > >  	}
> > > >  
> > > > +	if (p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING)
> > > > +		add_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);
> > > > +
> > > >  	/*
> > > >  	 * If p is throttled, we do nothing. In fact, if it exhausted
> > > >  	 * its budget it needs a replenishment and, since it now is on
> > > >  	 * its rq, the bandwidth timer callback (which clearly has not
> > > >  	 * run yet) will take care of this.
> > > >  	 */
> > > > -	if (p->dl.dl_throttled && !(flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH))
> > > > +	if (p->dl.dl_throttled && !(flags & ENQUEUE_REPLENISH)) {
> > > > +		add_running_bw(&p->dl, &rq->dl);    
> > > 
> > > Don't rememeber if we discussed this already, but do we need to add the bw here
> > > even if the task is not actually enqueued until after the replenishment timer
> > > fires?  
> > I think yes... The active utilization does not depend on the fact that the task
> > is on the runqueue or not, but depends on the task's state (in GRUB parlance,
> > "inactive" vs "active contending"). In other words, even when a task is throttled
> > its utilization must be counted in the active utilization.
> >   
> 
> OK. Could you add a comment about this point please (so that I don't
> forget again :)?
So, I just changed the comment in

        /*
         * If p is throttled, we do not enqueue it. In fact, if it exhausted
         * its budget it needs a replenishment and, since it now is on
         * its rq, the bandwidth timer callback (which clearly has not
         * run yet) will take care of this.
         * However, the active utilization does not depend on the fact
         * that the task is on the runqueue or not (but depends on the
         * task's state - in GRUB parlance, "inactive" vs "active contending").
         * In other words, even if a task is throttled its utilization must
         * be counted in the active utilization; hence, we need to call
	 * add_running_bw().
         */

Is this ok?


			Thanks,
				Luca

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-09 16:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-24 14:06 [RFC v3 0/6] CPU reclaiming for SCHED_DEADLINE Luca Abeni
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 1/6] Track the active utilisation Luca Abeni
2016-10-25  9:09   ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
2016-10-25  9:29     ` luca abeni
2016-10-25 13:58       ` Steven Rostedt
2016-10-25 18:04         ` Luca Abeni
2016-11-18 14:23         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 15:10           ` luca abeni
2016-11-18 15:28             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 16:42           ` Steven Rostedt
2016-12-05 22:30           ` luca abeni
2016-12-06  8:35             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-06  8:57               ` luca abeni
2016-12-06 13:47               ` luca abeni
2016-11-01 16:45   ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-01 21:10     ` luca abeni
2016-11-08 17:56       ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-08 18:17         ` Luca Abeni
2016-11-08 18:53           ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-08 19:09             ` Luca Abeni
2016-11-08 20:02               ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-09 15:25                 ` luca abeni
2016-11-09 16:29         ` luca abeni [this message]
2016-11-18 14:55         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 13:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 15:06     ` luca abeni
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 2/6] Improve the tracking of " Luca Abeni
2016-11-01 16:46   ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-01 21:46     ` luca abeni
2016-11-02  2:35       ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 10:04         ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-10 11:56           ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-10 12:15             ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 12:34               ` Juri Lelli
2016-11-10 12:45                 ` luca abeni
2016-11-02  2:41   ` luca abeni
2016-11-18 15:36   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 15:56     ` luca abeni
2016-11-18 15:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-18 16:06     ` luca abeni
2016-11-18 18:49       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 3/6] Fix the update of the total -deadline utilization Luca Abeni
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 4/6] GRUB accounting Luca Abeni
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 5/6] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Luca Abeni
2016-10-24 14:06 ` [RFC v3 6/6] Make GRUB a task's flag Luca Abeni

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=20161109172927.21619bac@utopia \
    --to=luca.abeni@unitn.it \
    --cc=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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.