From: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
To: Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] sched/deadline: Fix reclaim inaccuracy with SMP
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 11:56:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230519115621.2b3f75e2@luca64> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAO7JXPh5uLV4QjAEi6bJXfAGSsZ=XsnCyzrvKS8m35BGbRPYJw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
sorry for returning on this discussion, but there is something I still
do not understand:
On Tue, 16 May 2023 11:08:18 -0400
Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org> wrote:
[...]
> I had tested this and it was reclaiming much less compared to the
> first one. I had 3 tasks with reservation (3,100) and 3 cpus.
So, just to confirm: here you have only 3 SCHED_DEADLINE tasks,
scheduled on a root domain containing only 3 CPUs (dl_bw_cpus() return
3)... Right?
So, the utilization of each task is 3/100 = 0.03 and Uextra is
1 - (0.03 * 3) / 3 = 0.97.
And since all the tasks are always active, Uinact = 0...
Is this understanding right?
If so:
> With dq = -(max{u_i, (Umax - Uinact - Uextra)} / Umax) * dt (1)
> TID[636]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 95.08
> TID[635]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 95.07
> TID[637]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 95.06
>
> With dq = -(max{u_i, (1 - Uinact - Uextra)} / Umax) * dt (2)
> TID[601]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 35.65
> TID[600]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 35.65
> TID[602]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 35.65
Here, we should have
dq = -(max{0.03, (1 - 0 - 0.97)} / Umax) * dt
= -(0.03 / Umax) * dt
which reclaims up to Umax... So, the utilization should be 95%
Since you measured 35.65%, it means that (1-Uextra) is much larger
than 0.97... So, maybe you found some bug in the Uextra computation?
Can you try printing the extra_bw value, to check what happened?
Thanks,
Luca
>
> As the task bandwidth goes higher, equation (2) reclaims more, but
> equation (2) is a constant of 95% as long as number of tasks less
> than cpus. If the number of tasks is more than cpus, eq (2) fares
> better in reclaiming than eq (1)
>
> eq (1) with 5 tasks (3,100)
> TID[627]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 28.64
> TID[626]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 28.64
> TID[629]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 28.62
> TID[628]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 29.00
> TID[630]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 28.99
>
> Here top shows 3 cpus in the range ~45 to 50% util
>
> eq (2) with 5 tasks (3,100)
> TID[667]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 57.20
> TID[670]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 57.79
> TID[668]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 57.11
> TID[666]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 56.34
> TID[669]: RECLAIM=1, (r=3ms, d=100ms, p=100ms), Util: 55.82
>
> And here top shows all 3 cpus with 95% util
>
> > I'll write more about this later... And thanks for coping with all
> > my comments!
> >
> Thanks :-)
>
> Vineeth
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-19 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-15 2:57 [PATCH v3 0/5] GRUB reclaiming fixes Vineeth Pillai
2023-05-15 2:57 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] sched/deadline: Fix bandwidth reclaim equation in GRUB Vineeth Pillai
2023-05-15 2:57 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] sched/deadline: Fix reclaim inaccuracy with SMP Vineeth Pillai
2023-05-15 8:06 ` luca abeni
2023-05-16 1:47 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-16 7:37 ` luca abeni
2023-05-16 15:08 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-16 16:19 ` luca abeni
2023-05-17 2:17 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-19 9:56 ` luca abeni [this message]
2023-05-19 10:18 ` luca abeni
2023-05-19 16:12 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-20 9:50 ` luca abeni
2023-05-20 9:58 ` luca abeni
2023-05-22 19:22 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-23 20:58 ` luca abeni
2023-05-24 2:11 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-26 14:54 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-26 15:18 ` luca abeni
2023-05-19 17:56 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-05-20 2:15 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2023-05-25 11:55 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-05-15 2:57 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] sched/deadline: Remove unused variable extra_bw Vineeth Pillai
2023-05-15 2:57 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] sched/deadline: Account for normal deadline tasks in GRUB Vineeth Pillai
2023-05-15 2:57 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] Documentation: sched/deadline: Update GRUB description Vineeth Pillai
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=20230519115621.2b3f75e2@luca64 \
--to=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vineeth@bitbyteword.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).