[Linux-ia64] [case closed] Re: web page on O(1) scheduler

[Linux-ia64] [case closed] Re: web page on O(1) scheduler

[Mike Galbraith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2102 bytes --]

At 06:25 PM 5/22/2003 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>At 11:52 AM 5/22/2003 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>At 10:56 AM 5/21/2003 -0700, David Mosberger wrote:
>>> >>>>> On Wed, 21 May 2003 11:26:31 +0200, Mike Galbraith 
>>> <efault@gmx.de> said:
>>>
>>>   Mike> The page mentions persistent starvation.  My own explorations
>>>   Mike> of this issue indicate that the primary source is always
>>>   Mike> selecting the highest priority queue.
>>>
>>>My working assumption is that the problem is a bug with the dynamic
>>>prioritization.  The task receiving the signals calls sleep() after
>>>handling a signal and hence it's dynamic priority should end up higher
>>>than the priority of the task sending signals (since the sender never
>>>relinquishes the CPU voluntarily).
>>>
>>>However, I haven't actually had time to look at the relevant code, so
>>>I may be missing something.  If you understand the issue better,
>>>please explain to me why this isn't a dynamic priority issue.
>>
>>You're right, it looks like a corner case.
>
>Out of curiosity, is someone hitting that with a real program?
>
>         -Mike
>
>aside:
>if so, I suppose nano-ticks may be needed....

Since I spent a bunch of time fumbling around with this problem, I may as 
well post one last time and put it to bed.  I bet Ingo has a _lot_ better 
way to cure that problem, but...

Yes indeed, pedantic tracking of cpu usage does fix the problem.  It also 
makes for some interesting changes in contest numbers (well, _I_ find them 
interesting;)  If anyone wants to see the numbers, they're attached.  If 
anyone wants to try the attached diff, it's attached too, have fun... the 
standard "you get to keep the pieces" lkml warrantee applies :)  FWIW, it 
works just fine here, and the only time someone now manages to steal ticks 
(one) is (apparently) once in a long while when someone (whose initials 
appear to be IDE:) keeps interrupts disabled for too long.  Nobody has yet 
managed to steal more than one tick.

         The End,

         -Mike

P.S.  ok, so they're micro-ticks... what's a few orders of magnitude :) 

[-- Attachment #2: xx.diff --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 7534 bytes --]

--- linux-2.5.69.virgin/include/linux/sched.h.org	Fri May 23 07:14:23 2003
+++ linux-2.5.69.virgin/include/linux/sched.h	Tue May 27 09:30:51 2003
@@ -328,7 +328,9 @@
 	prio_array_t *array;
 
 	unsigned long sleep_avg;
-	unsigned long last_run;
+	unsigned long long last_run;
+	unsigned int run_nsecs;
+	unsigned int sleep_nsecs;
 
 	unsigned long policy;
 	unsigned long cpus_allowed;
--- linux-2.5.69.virgin/kernel/sched.c.org	Sun May 25 06:05:42 2003
+++ linux-2.5.69.virgin/kernel/sched.c	Tue May 27 12:58:02 2003
@@ -74,6 +74,12 @@
 #define MAX_SLEEP_AVG		(10*HZ)
 #define STARVATION_LIMIT	(10*HZ)
 #define NODE_THRESHOLD		125
+#define SCHED_NANOSECOND	1
+#define SCHED_SECOND		(1000000000 * SCHED_NANOSECOND)
+#define SCHED_TICK		(SCHED_SECOND / HZ)
+#define TICKS_PER_SECOND	(SCHED_SECOND / SCHED_TICK)
+
+extern unsigned long long monotonic_clock(void);
 
 /*
  * If a task is 'interactive' then we reinsert it in the active
@@ -342,10 +348,23 @@
  */
 static inline int activate_task(task_t *p, runqueue_t *rq)
 {
-	long sleep_time = jiffies - p->last_run - 1;
-	int requeue_waker = 0;
+	unsigned long long now = monotonic_clock();
+	long long sleep =  now - p->last_run + p->sleep_nsecs;
+	int ticks = 0, requeue_waker = 0;
+
+	if (sleep >= SCHED_TICK) {
+		while (sleep >= SCHED_SECOND) {
+			sleep -= SCHED_SECOND;
+			ticks += TICKS_PER_SECOND;
+		}
+		while (sleep >= SCHED_TICK) {
+			sleep -= SCHED_TICK;
+			ticks++;
+		}
+		p->sleep_nsecs = sleep;
+	} else p->sleep_nsecs += sleep;
 
-	if (sleep_time > 0) {
+	if (ticks > 0) {
 		int sleep_avg;
 
 		/*
@@ -356,7 +375,7 @@
 		 * spends sleeping, the higher the average gets - and the
 		 * higher the priority boost gets as well.
 		 */
-		sleep_avg = p->sleep_avg + sleep_time;
+		sleep_avg = p->sleep_avg + ticks;
 
 		/*
 		 * 'Overflow' bonus ticks go to the waker as well, so the
@@ -364,8 +383,10 @@
 		 * boosting tasks that are related to maximum-interactive
 		 * tasks.
 		 */
-		if (sleep_avg > MAX_SLEEP_AVG)
+		if (sleep_avg > MAX_SLEEP_AVG) {
 			sleep_avg = MAX_SLEEP_AVG;
+			p->sleep_nsecs = 0;
+		}
 		if (p->sleep_avg != sleep_avg) {
 			p->sleep_avg = sleep_avg;
 			p->prio = effective_prio(p);
@@ -571,6 +592,8 @@
 	current->sleep_avg = current->sleep_avg * PARENT_PENALTY / 100;
 	p->sleep_avg = p->sleep_avg * CHILD_PENALTY / 100;
 	p->prio = effective_prio(p);
+	p->run_nsecs = 0;
+	p->sleep_nsecs = 0;
 	set_task_cpu(p, smp_processor_id());
 
 	if (unlikely(!current->array))
@@ -1170,6 +1193,49 @@
 		(jiffies - (rq)->expired_timestamp >= \
 			STARVATION_LIMIT * ((rq)->nr_running) + 1)))
 
+inline void __scheduler_tick(runqueue_t *rq, task_t *p)
+{
+	unsigned long long now = monotonic_clock();
+	prio_array_t *array = rq->active;
+	int ticks;
+
+	p->run_nsecs += now - p->last_run;
+	/* Task might have expired already, but not scheduled off yet */
+	if (p->array != array) {
+		set_tsk_need_resched(p);
+		goto abort;
+	}
+	if (p->run_nsecs < SCHED_TICK || p->policy == SCHED_FIFO )
+		goto abort;
+
+	for (ticks = 0; p->run_nsecs >= SCHED_TICK; ticks++)
+		p->run_nsecs -= SCHED_TICK;
+	if (ticks > p->time_slice)
+		show_task(p);
+	if (p->sleep_avg > ticks)
+		p->sleep_avg -= ticks;
+	else
+		p->sleep_avg = 0;
+	p->time_slice -= ticks;
+
+	if (p->time_slice <= 0) {
+		dequeue_task(p, p->array);
+		p->prio = effective_prio(p);
+		p->time_slice = task_timeslice(p);
+		p->first_time_slice = 0;
+		set_tsk_need_resched(p);
+		if ((EXPIRED_STARVING(rq) && !rt_task(p)) ||
+				!TASK_INTERACTIVE(p)) {
+			array = rq->expired;
+			if (!rq->expired_timestamp)
+				rq->expired_timestamp = jiffies;
+		}
+		enqueue_task(p, array);
+	}
+abort:
+	p->last_run = monotonic_clock();
+}
+
 /*
  * This function gets called by the timer code, with HZ frequency.
  * We call it with interrupts disabled.
@@ -1182,11 +1248,12 @@
 	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
 	runqueue_t *rq = this_rq();
 	task_t *p = current;
+	int idle = p == rq->idle;
 
 	if (rcu_pending(cpu))
 		rcu_check_callbacks(cpu, user_ticks);
 
-	if (p == rq->idle) {
+	if (idle) {
 		/* note: this timer irq context must be accounted for as well */
 		if (irq_count() - HARDIRQ_OFFSET >= SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)
 			kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.system += sys_ticks;
@@ -1194,8 +1261,7 @@
 			kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.iowait += sys_ticks;
 		else
 			kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.idle += sys_ticks;
-		rebalance_tick(rq, 1);
-		return;
+		goto out;
 	}
 	if (TASK_NICE(p) > 0)
 		kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.nice += user_ticks;
@@ -1203,11 +1269,6 @@
 		kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.user += user_ticks;
 	kstat_cpu(cpu).cpustat.system += sys_ticks;
 
-	/* Task might have expired already, but not scheduled off yet */
-	if (p->array != rq->active) {
-		set_tsk_need_resched(p);
-		return;
-	}
 	spin_lock(&rq->lock);
 	/*
 	 * The task was running during this tick - update the
@@ -1217,41 +1278,10 @@
 	 * it possible for interactive tasks to use up their
 	 * timeslices at their highest priority levels.
 	 */
-	if (p->sleep_avg)
-		p->sleep_avg--;
-	if (unlikely(rt_task(p))) {
-		/*
-		 * RR tasks need a special form of timeslice management.
-		 * FIFO tasks have no timeslices.
-		 */
-		if ((p->policy == SCHED_RR) && !--p->time_slice) {
-			p->time_slice = task_timeslice(p);
-			p->first_time_slice = 0;
-			set_tsk_need_resched(p);
-
-			/* put it at the end of the queue: */
-			dequeue_task(p, rq->active);
-			enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
-		}
-		goto out;
-	}
-	if (!--p->time_slice) {
-		dequeue_task(p, rq->active);
-		set_tsk_need_resched(p);
-		p->prio = effective_prio(p);
-		p->time_slice = task_timeslice(p);
-		p->first_time_slice = 0;
-
-		if (!TASK_INTERACTIVE(p) || EXPIRED_STARVING(rq)) {
-			if (!rq->expired_timestamp)
-				rq->expired_timestamp = jiffies;
-			enqueue_task(p, rq->expired);
-		} else
-			enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
-	}
-out:
+	 __scheduler_tick(rq, p);
 	spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
-	rebalance_tick(rq, 0);
+out:
+	rebalance_tick(rq, idle);
 }
 
 void scheduling_functions_start_here(void) { }
@@ -1286,8 +1316,8 @@
 	rq = this_rq();
 
 	release_kernel_lock(prev);
-	prev->last_run = jiffies;
 	spin_lock_irq(&rq->lock);
+	__scheduler_tick(rq, prev);
 
 	/*
 	 * if entering off of a kernel preemption go straight
@@ -1342,6 +1372,7 @@
 	if (likely(prev != next)) {
 		rq->nr_switches++;
 		rq->curr = next;
+		next->last_run = prev->last_run;
 
 		prepare_arch_switch(rq, next);
 		prev = context_switch(rq, prev, next);
--- linux-2.5.69.virgin/arch/i386/kernel/timers/timer_tsc.c.org	Sat May 24 08:55:05 2003
+++ linux-2.5.69.virgin/arch/i386/kernel/timers/timer_tsc.c	Sat May 24 09:26:09 2003
@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@
 static unsigned long long monotonic_clock_tsc(void)
 {
 	unsigned long long last_offset, this_offset, base;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	
 	/* atomically read monotonic base & last_offset */
-	read_lock_irq(&monotonic_lock);
+	read_lock_irqsave(&monotonic_lock, flags);
 	last_offset = ((unsigned long long)last_tsc_high<<32)|last_tsc_low;
 	base = monotonic_base;
-	read_unlock_irq(&monotonic_lock);
+	read_unlock_irqrestore(&monotonic_lock, flags);
 
 	/* Read the Time Stamp Counter */
 	rdtscll(this_offset);
--- linux-2.5.69.virgin/kernel/printk.c.org	Sun May 25 09:10:38 2003
+++ linux-2.5.69.virgin/kernel/printk.c	Sun May 25 09:11:04 2003
@@ -510,8 +510,10 @@
 	console_may_schedule = 0;
 	up(&console_sem);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&logbuf_lock, flags);
+#if 0
 	if (wake_klogd && !oops_in_progress && waitqueue_active(&log_wait))
 		wake_up_interruptible(&log_wait);
+#endif
 }
 
 /** console_conditional_schedule - yield the CPU if required

[-- Attachment #3: contest.log --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 1557 bytes --]

no_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	153	94.8	0.0	0.0	1.00
2.5.69X      1	154	94.2	0.0	0.0	1.00
cacherun:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	146	98.6	0.0	0.0	0.95
2.5.69X      1	147	98.6	0.0	0.0	0.95
process_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	331	43.8	90.0	55.3	2.16
2.5.69X      1	344	41.9	94.0	57.0	2.23
ctar_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	190	77.9	0.0	0.0	1.24
2.5.69X      1	187	79.1	0.0	0.0	1.21
xtar_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	196	75.0	0.0	3.1	1.28
2.5.69X      1	198	74.7	0.0	3.5	1.29
io_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	437	34.6	69.1	15.1	2.86
2.5.69X      1	349	43.3	53.3	14.9	2.27
io_other:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	387	38.8	69.3	17.3	2.53
2.5.69X      1	436	34.9	63.4	14.0	2.83
read_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	221	67.0	9.4	3.6	1.44
2.5.69X      1	208	71.2	9.0	3.4	1.35
list_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	203	71.4	99.0	20.2	1.33
2.5.69X      1	204	71.1	100.0	20.1	1.32
mem_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	256	57.8	34.0	1.2	1.67
2.5.69X      1	244	60.2	36.0	1.2	1.58
dbench_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	517	28.8	5.0	35.6	3.38
2.5.69X      1	444	33.3	3.0	28.8	2.88
ab_load:
Kernel  [runs]	Time	CPU%	Loads	LCPU%	Ratio
2.5.69       1	300	48.3	46.0	21.7	1.96
2.5.69X      1	293	49.5	44.0	21.5	1.90