public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Kuyo Chang <kuyo.chang@mediatek.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@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>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	jstultz <jstultz@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] sched/deadline: Fix fair_server runtime calculation formula
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 14:33:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aFFgi_9yxLN-auBE@jlelli-thinkpadt14gen4.remote.csb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250617085558.GN1613376@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 17/06/25 10:55, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 10:04:55AM +0800, Kuyo Chang wrote:
> > From: kuyo chang <kuyo.chang@mediatek.com>
> > 
> > [Symptom]
> > The calculation formula for fair_server runtime is based on
> > Frequency/CPU scale-invariance.
> > This will cause excessive RT latency (expect absolute time).
> > 
> > [Analysis]
> > Consider the following case under a Big.LITTLE architecture:
> > 
> > Assume the runtime is : 50,000,000 ns, and FIE/CIE as below
> > FIE: 100
> > CIE:50
> > First by FIE, the runtime is scaled to 50,000,000 * 100 >> 10 = 4,882,812
> > Then by CIE, it is further scaled to 4,882,812 * 50 >> 10 = 238,418.
> 
> What's this FIE/CIE stuff? Is that some ARM lingo?
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > index ad45a8fea245..8bfa846cf0dc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > @@ -1504,7 +1504,10 @@ static void update_curr_dl_se(struct rq *rq, struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64
> >  	if (dl_entity_is_special(dl_se))
> >  		return;
> >  
> > -	scaled_delta_exec = dl_scaled_delta_exec(rq, dl_se, delta_exec);
> > +	if (dl_se == &rq->fair_server)
> > +		scaled_delta_exec = delta_exec;
> > +	else
> > +		scaled_delta_exec = dl_scaled_delta_exec(rq, dl_se, delta_exec);
> 
> Juri, the point it a bit moot atm, but is this something specific to the
> fair_server in particular, or all servers?

I believe for other servers (i.e., rt-server work from Yuri and Luca) it
might be useful to have it configurable somehow. I actually had a recent
discussion about this concerning single task entities (traditional
deadline servers) for which as well there might be cases where one might
want not to scale considering frequency and capacity.

> Because if this is something all servers require then the above is
> ofcourse wrong.

To me it looks like we want this (no scaling) for fair_server (and
possibly scx_server?) as for them we are only looking into a 'fixed
time' type of isolation. Full fledged servers (hierarchical scheduling)
maybe have it configurable, or enabled by default as a start (as we have
it today).

Best,
Juri



  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-17 13:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-14  2:04 [PATCH 1/1] sched/deadline: Fix fair_server runtime calculation formula Kuyo Chang
2025-06-14  2:35 ` John Stultz
2025-06-16 14:03 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-17  8:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-17 12:33   ` Juri Lelli [this message]
2025-06-17 14:14     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-06-17 14:23       ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-17 14:41         ` Kuyo Chang (張建文)

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=aFFgi_9yxLN-auBE@jlelli-thinkpadt14gen4.remote.csb \
    --to=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=jstultz@google.com \
    --cc=kuyo.chang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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