From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 475BE134CF; Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:07:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755608822; cv=none; b=VJc+cZUwmfxJ0UglEslia9z7Ggk8mptjujnSZW43UDG0RN5KyWleofFuNpCnNpMq77S67nqG51WEAX0qKA3k997iDVDMi+hGXiMQIizLZZ36MML+5zJ5vp020NZxeXQpJk+vjCShweopMUnTWhm3ax+681XRYmxsHt02XvXGzRo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755608822; c=relaxed/simple; bh=G6B7tqpxuZUp89hJxYSF+ooqPCxIAKaEKj5LW0V4ZS8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=iozM1lr/mcVEOgNO28SLwg+mqPaKpK0o1fOPQ1wqrVaAya0puhJ0hj3GBEGWL5PBR9NihLXvmHj9bEuzEr31uyBjAxxrCuP2k7IxNIGZOvuDkZVPU4Q5j7s0mhG0rHQkzdlHDc23W5/w0QUCGEkSsol28uZ6x9djWgFkcDpnEOI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=YyzS69Yp; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=KIUELU3C; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="YyzS69Yp"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="KIUELU3C" Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 15:06:56 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1755608818; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Fcst1kKyduOpiM5s2IszivugeQbhO707fJBDCu3lH9c=; b=YyzS69Ypo/ZY9PWLbcVo/0SaZTHTkU2z9GWAdWIfl2PVGl8qbWCxf0iwBmdt2wpu1G18Lp S3lM0U5ttrZzq6c3uAwvALSee2wfxwRCMgMe/yUT9kxzdZS95Tz8SgswqEzVbZiKRA+Tfa kSJB2k9/0sNkIj7gs7Zb7Q4h2Z+ZUbzbxQSHWypJy+CtGvAi4ZmCuAWbCfv06hHZoB1SGD NY3ZsT85V0bKvS+T82gizkzunj5zHrEi21GVStaw6D+q5nWmJkAV6o4OZwB0/M2AoxmcSU c2/MpDQKSLcIaviuoEX73bvc7AfxCC8rcETjCJR1UqCzwsj/lerFUAB02iC2eA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1755608818; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Fcst1kKyduOpiM5s2IszivugeQbhO707fJBDCu3lH9c=; b=KIUELU3CQOrpO7y21PFpdTByTJkwCx2RliawJgLdkuLxXlZttxa2wnIAi2yPsDOYMySFLo pzTMMJO8hjcocxDA== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Xin Zhao Cc: tj@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com, longman@redhat.com, clrkwllms@kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cgroup: Lock optimize for cgroup cpu throttle Message-ID: <20250819130656.DdJqAScZ@linutronix.de> References: <20250811151316.838707-1-jackzxcui1989@163.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250811151316.838707-1-jackzxcui1989@163.com> On 2025-08-11 23:13:16 [+0800], Xin Zhao wrote: > Dear Sebastian, > > I believe what you mentioned is related to the same issue that Valentin > brought up later, which is the current solution of "delaying CPU throttling > through the task_work mechanism until returning to user mode." > My colleagues and I indeed noticed this from the beginning. However, on our > 6.1.134 RT-Linux system, we have tried new versions of this solution one by > one, but they have all failed during basic script tests, so none have reached > the stage of being used in our project. I see that this modification has been > promoted in the community for more than two years, yet it remains in a state > that doesn't work well (on our 6.1.134 RT-Linux system). I wonder if the > changes require too many considerations or if this modification simply isn't > suitable for running on RT-Linux. Our project cannot afford to wait, and > there are many performance issues in RT-Linux. You are free to use the patch. Based on your description I assume that the patch Valentin referenced will solve your problem. If not, it will be interesting to know why it is not working. Otherwise you keep maintaining your patch. > Thanks > Xin Zhao Sebastian