From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
To: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@arm.com>,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] sched/uclamp: Protect uclamp fast path code with static key
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:44:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jhj8sg4hor4.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87366dnfaq.derkling@matbug.net>
On 30/06/20 09:11, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> Hi Qais,
> here are some more 2c from me...
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 18:26:33 +0200, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com> wrote...
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> index 235b2cae00a0..8d80d6091d86 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
>> @@ -794,6 +794,26 @@ unsigned int sysctl_sched_uclamp_util_max = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
>> /* All clamps are required to be less or equal than these values */
>> static struct uclamp_se uclamp_default[UCLAMP_CNT];
>>
>> +/*
>> + * This static key is used to reduce the uclamp overhead in the fast path. It
>> + * primarily disables the call to uclamp_rq_{inc, dec}() in
>> + * enqueue/dequeue_task().
>> + *
>> + * This allows users to continue to enable uclamp in their kernel config with
>> + * minimum uclamp overhead in the fast path.
>> + *
>> + * As soon as userspace modifies any of the uclamp knobs, the static key is
>> + * enabled, since we have an actual users that make use of uclamp
>> + * functionality.
>> + *
>> + * The knobs that would enable this static key are:
>> + *
>> + * * A task modifying its uclamp value with sched_setattr().
>> + * * An admin modifying the sysctl_sched_uclamp_{min, max} via procfs.
>> + * * An admin modifying the cgroup cpu.uclamp.{min, max}
>
> I guess this list can be obtained with a grep or git changelog, moreover
> this text will require maintenance.
>
> What about replacing this full comment with something shorted like:
>
> ---8<---
> Static key to reduce uclamp overhead in the fast path by disabling
> calls to uclamp_rq_{inc, dec}().
> ---8<---
>
Having some sense of when that key gets flipped is worthwhile IMO; though
it may not have to be exhaustive list.
>> + */
>> +DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(sched_uclamp_used);
>> +
>> /* Integer rounded range for each bucket */
>> #define UCLAMP_BUCKET_DELTA DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE, UCLAMP_BUCKETS)
>>
[...]
>> @@ -1032,6 +1073,13 @@ static inline void uclamp_rq_inc(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>> enum uclamp_id clamp_id;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Avoid any overhead until uclamp is actually used by the userspace.
>> + * Including the branch if we use static_branch_likely()
>
> I still find this last sentence hard to parse, but perhaps it's just me
> still missing a breakfast :)
>
AIUI this tries to explain why we use 'unlikely' rather than 'likely' -
it's to prevent !uclamp users from having the branch overhead (see
include/linux/jump_label.h, there's a nice fat comment just above
static_branch_likely()).
IMO that point is already covered by the first sentence, as I blabbered on
some previous version.
>> + */
>> + if (!static_branch_unlikely(&sched_uclamp_used))
>> + return;
>
> I'm also still wondering if the optimization is still working when we
> have that ! in front.
>
> Had a check at:
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/jump_label.h#L399
>
> and AFAIU, it all boils down to cook a __branch_check()'s compiler hint,
> and ISTR that those are "anti-patterns"?
>
> That said we do have some usages for this pattern too:
>
> $ git grep '!static_branch_unlikely' | wc -l 36
> $ git grep 'static_branch_unlikely' | wc -l 220
>
> ?
>
We use it for e.g. the sched_asym_cpucapacity key, and that works (and I've
been down into the asm a few times).
>> +
>> if (unlikely(!p->sched_class->uclamp_enabled))
>> return;
>>
>
> [...]
>
>> +/**
>> + * uclamp_rq_util_with - clamp @util with @rq and @p effective uclamp values.
>> + * @rq: The rq to clamp against. Must not be NULL.
>> + * @util: The util value to clamp.
>> + * @p: The task to clamp against. Can be NULL if you want to clamp
>> + * against @rq only.
>> + *
>> + * Clamps the passed @util to the max(@rq, @p) effective uclamp values.
>> + *
>> + * If sched_uclamp_used static key is disabled, then just return the util
>> + * without any clamping since uclamp aggregation at the rq level in the fast
>> + * path is disabled, rendering this operation a NOP.
>> + *
>> + * Use uclamp_eff_value() if you don't care about uclamp values at rq level. It
>> + * will return the correct effective uclamp value of the task even if the
>> + * static key is disabled.
>
> Well, if you don't care about rq, you don't call a uclamp_rq_* method.
>
> I would say that the above paragraph is redundant, moreover it adds some
> cross-reference to a different method (name) which required maintenance.
>
> What about removing it?
>
>> + */
>> static __always_inline
>> unsigned long uclamp_rq_util_with(struct rq *rq, unsigned long util,
>> struct task_struct *p)
>> {
>> - unsigned long min_util = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MIN].value);
>> - unsigned long max_util = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MAX].value);
>> + unsigned long min_util;
>> + unsigned long max_util;
>> +
>> + if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_uclamp_used))
>> + return util;
>> +
>> + min_util = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MIN].value);
>> + max_util = READ_ONCE(rq->uclamp[UCLAMP_MAX].value);
>
> I think moving the initialization is not required, the compiler should
> be smart enough to place theme where's better.
>
Not so sure with the READ_ONCE() & the volatile underneath; a quick
compiler test with a volatile read before a branch tells me we still do the
read before the branch, even if the value is only used after the branch.
>> if (p) {
>> min_util = max(min_util, uclamp_eff_value(p, UCLAMP_MIN));
>> @@ -2371,6 +2396,11 @@ unsigned long uclamp_rq_util_with(struct rq *rq, unsigned long util,
>>
>> return clamp(util, min_util, max_util);
>> }
>> +
>> +static inline bool uclamp_is_enabled(void)
>> +{
>> + return static_branch_likely(&sched_uclamp_used);
>> +}
>
> Looks like here we mix up terms, which can be confusing.
> AFAIKS, we use:
> - *_enabled for the sched class flags (compile time)
> - *_used for the user-space opting in (run time)
>
> Thus, perhaps we can just use the same pattern used by the
> sched_numa_balancing static key:
>
> $ git grep sched_numa_balancing
> kernel/sched/core.c:DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(sched_numa_balancing);
> kernel/sched/core.c: static_branch_enable(&sched_numa_balancing);
> kernel/sched/core.c: static_branch_disable(&sched_numa_balancing);
> kernel/sched/core.c: int state = static_branch_likely(&sched_numa_balancing);
> kernel/sched/fair.c: if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_numa_balancing))
> kernel/sched/fair.c: if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_numa_balancing))
> kernel/sched/fair.c: if (!static_branch_likely(&sched_numa_balancing))
> kernel/sched/fair.c: if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_numa_balancing))
> kernel/sched/sched.h:extern struct static_key_false sched_numa_balancing;
>
> IOW: unconditionally define sched_uclamp_used as non static in core.c,
> and use it directly on schedutil too.
>
>> #else /* CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK */
>> static inline
>> unsigned long uclamp_rq_util_with(struct rq *rq, unsigned long util,
>> @@ -2378,6 +2408,11 @@ unsigned long uclamp_rq_util_with(struct rq *rq, unsigned long util,
>> {
>> return util;
>> }
>> +
>> +static inline bool uclamp_is_enabled(void)
>> +{
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> #endif /* CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK */
>>
>> #ifdef arch_scale_freq_capacity
>
> Best,
> Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-30 9:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-29 16:26 [PATCH v5 0/2] sched: Optionally skip uclamp logic in fast path Qais Yousef
2020-06-29 16:26 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] sched/uclamp: Fix initialization of struct uclamp_rq Qais Yousef
2020-06-29 16:26 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] sched/uclamp: Protect uclamp fast path code with static key Qais Yousef
2020-06-30 8:11 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-30 9:44 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2020-06-30 9:46 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-30 14:55 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-30 15:40 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-30 17:44 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-30 18:04 ` Qais Yousef
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=jhj8sg4hor4.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chris.redpath@arm.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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.