From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Gautham Shenoy <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not wakeup-preempt same-prio SCHED_OTHER tasks
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 11:02:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZQljoiSBhZLEFI/G@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0e153dd25900af70f91e4a73f960320e6daf3c6a.camel@gmx.de>
* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-08-22 at 08:33 +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> > Hello Mike,
>
> Greetings!
>
> > > FWIW, there are more tbench shards lying behind EEVDF than in front.
> > >
> > > tbench 8 on old i7-4790 box
> > > 4.4.302 4024
> > > 6.4.11 3668
> > > 6.4.11-eevdf 3522
> > >
> >
> > I agree, but on servers, tbench has been useful to identify a variety of
> > issues [1][2][3] and I believe it is better to pick some shards up than
> > leave them lying around for others to step on :)
>
> Absolutely, but in this case it isn't due to various overheads wiggling
> about and/or bitrot, everything's identical except the scheduler, and
> its overhead essentially is too.
>
> taskset -c 3 pipe-test
> 6.4.11 1.420033 usecs/loop -- avg 1.420033 1408.4 KHz
> 6.4.11-eevdf 1.413024 usecs/loop -- avg 1.413024 1415.4 KHz
>
> Methinks these shards are due to tbench simply being one of those
> things that happens to like the CFS notion of short term fairness a bit
> better than the EEVDF notion, ie are inevitable fallout tied to the
> very thing that makes EEVDF service less spiky that CFS, and thus will
> be difficult to sweep up.
>
> Too bad I didn't save Peter's test hack to make EEVDF use the same
> notion of fair (not a keeper) as I think that would likely prove it.
BTW., if overscheduling is still an issue, I'm wondering whether we
could go so far as to turn off wakeup preemption for same-prio
SCHED_OTHER tasks altogether, as per the attached patch?
What does this do to your various tests? Test booted only.
Thanks,
Ingo
=============>
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 10:49:51 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not wakeup-preempt same-prio SCHED_OTHER tasks
Reduce overscheduling some more: do not wakeup-preempt same-priority
SCHED_OTHER tasks.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
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 a502e3255392..98efe01c8e4e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -8042,7 +8042,7 @@ static void check_preempt_wakeup_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int
* Batch and idle tasks do not preempt non-idle tasks (their preemption
* is driven by the tick):
*/
- if (unlikely(p->policy != SCHED_NORMAL) || !sched_feat(WAKEUP_PREEMPTION))
+ if (unlikely(p->policy != SCHED_NORMAL) || likely(p->prio == curr->prio) || !sched_feat(WAKEUP_PREEMPTION))
return;
find_matching_se(&se, &pse);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-19 9:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-10 13:24 [tip:sched/eevdf] [sched/fair] e0c2ff903c: phoronix-test-suite.blogbench.Write.final_score -34.8% regression kernel test robot
2023-08-11 1:11 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-11 2:42 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-14 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-14 18:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-15 23:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 3:54 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-16 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 13:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 15:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-16 20:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-17 1:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-17 15:10 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/eevdf: Curb wakeup-preemption tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-21 10:39 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-08-21 15:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-22 3:03 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-08-22 6:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-25 6:41 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-09-19 9:02 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2023-09-19 9:48 ` [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not wakeup-preempt same-prio SCHED_OTHER tasks Mike Galbraith
2023-09-22 10:00 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-25 11:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2023-09-25 16:45 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-18 1:09 ` [tip:sched/eevdf] [sched/fair] e0c2ff903c: phoronix-test-suite.blogbench.Write.final_score -34.8% regression Chen Yu
2023-08-22 6:48 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-22 7:07 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-16 3:40 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-16 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-14 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-18 1:54 ` 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=ZQljoiSBhZLEFI/G@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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 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.