From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] sched/fair: Add rate-limiting and validation helpers
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 12:10:15 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <015bfa4d-d89c-4d4e-be06-d6e46aec28cb@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251110033232.12538-3-kernellwp@gmail.com>
Hello Wanpeng,
On 11/10/2025 9:02 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> +/*
> + * High-frequency yield gating to reduce overhead on compute-intensive workloads.
> + * Returns true if the yield should be skipped due to frequency limits.
> + *
> + * Optimized: single threshold with READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE, refresh timestamp on every call.
> + */
> +static bool yield_deboost_rate_limit(struct rq *rq, u64 now_ns)
> +{
> + u64 last = READ_ONCE(rq->yield_deboost_last_time_ns);
> + bool limited = false;
> +
> + if (last) {
> + u64 delta = now_ns - last;
> + limited = (delta <= 6000ULL * NSEC_PER_USEC);
> + }
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(rq->yield_deboost_last_time_ns, now_ns);
We only look at local rq so READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() seems
unnecessary.
> + return limited;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Validate tasks and basic parameters for yield deboost operation.
> + * Performs comprehensive safety checks including feature enablement,
> + * NULL pointer validation, task state verification, and same-rq requirement.
> + * Returns false with appropriate debug logging if any validation fails,
> + * ensuring only safe and meaningful yield operations proceed.
> + */
> +static bool __maybe_unused yield_deboost_validate_tasks(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p_target,
> + struct task_struct **p_yielding_out,
> + struct sched_entity **se_y_out,
> + struct sched_entity **se_t_out)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *p_yielding;
> + struct sched_entity *se_y, *se_t;
> + u64 now_ns;
> +
> + if (!sysctl_sched_vcpu_debooster_enabled)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (!rq || !p_target)
> + return false;
> +
> + now_ns = rq->clock;
Brief look at Patch 5 suggests we are under the rq_lock so might
as well use the rq_clock(rq) helper. Also, you have to do a
update_rq_clock() since it isn't done until yield_task_fair().
> +
> + if (yield_deboost_rate_limit(rq, now_ns))
> + return false;
> +
> + p_yielding = rq->curr;
> + if (!p_yielding || p_yielding == p_target ||
> + p_target->sched_class != &fair_sched_class ||
> + p_yielding->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
> + return false;
yield_to() in syscall.c has already checked for the sched
class matching under double_rq_lock. That cannot change by the
time we are here.
> +
> + se_y = &p_yielding->se;
> + se_t = &p_target->se;
> +
> + if (!se_t || !se_y || !se_t->on_rq || !se_y->on_rq)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (task_rq(p_yielding) != rq || task_rq(p_target) != rq)
yield_to() has already checked for this under double_rq_lock()
so this too should be unnecessary.
> + return false;
> +
> + *p_yielding_out = p_yielding;
> + *se_y_out = se_y;
> + *se_t_out = se_t;
Why do we need these pointers? Can't the caller simply do:
if (!yield_deboost_validate_tasks(rq, target))
return;
p_yielding = rq->donor;
se_y_out = &p_yielding->se;
se_t = &target->se;
That reminds me - now that we have proxy execution, you need
to re-evaluate the usage of rq->curr (running context) vs
rq->donor (vruntime context) when looking at all this.
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * sched_yield() is very simple
> */
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-12 6:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-10 3:32 [PATCH 00/10] sched/kvm: Semantics-aware vCPU scheduling for oversubscribed KVM Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 01/10] sched: Add vCPU debooster infrastructure Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 02/10] sched/fair: Add rate-limiting and validation helpers Wanpeng Li
2025-11-12 6:40 ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2025-11-12 6:44 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 13:36 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-13 12:00 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 03/10] sched/fair: Add cgroup LCA finder for hierarchical yield Wanpeng Li
2025-11-12 6:50 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 8:59 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Add penalty calculation and application logic Wanpeng Li
2025-11-12 7:25 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 13:25 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Wire up yield deboost in yield_to_task_fair() Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 5:16 ` kernel test robot
2025-11-10 5:16 ` kernel test robot
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 06/10] KVM: Fix last_boosted_vcpu index assignment bug Wanpeng Li
2025-11-21 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-21 0:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-11-21 11:46 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 07/10] KVM: x86: Add IPI tracking infrastructure Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 08/10] KVM: x86/lapic: Integrate IPI tracking with interrupt delivery Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:32 ` [PATCH 09/10] KVM: Implement IPI-aware directed yield candidate selection Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 3:39 ` [PATCH 10/10] KVM: Relaxed boost as safety net Wanpeng Li
2025-11-10 12:02 ` [PATCH 00/10] sched/kvm: Semantics-aware vCPU scheduling for oversubscribed KVM Christian Borntraeger
2025-11-12 5:01 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-18 8:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2025-11-18 14:19 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-11 6:28 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-12 4:54 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-12 6:07 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 5:37 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-13 4:42 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 8:33 ` Wanpeng Li
2025-11-13 9:48 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-13 13:56 ` Wanpeng Li
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=015bfa4d-d89c-4d4e-be06-d6e46aec28cb@amd.com \
--to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox