public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Balazs Scheidler <bazsi@balabit.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: scheduler oddity [bug?]
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:20:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1236529200.7110.16.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090308153956.GB19658@elte.hu>

On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 16:39 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> > The problem with your particular testcase is that while one 
> > half has an avg_overlap (what we use as affinity hint for 
> > synchronous wakeups) which triggers the affinity hint, the 
> > other half has avg_overlap of zero, what it was born with, so 
> > despite significant execution overlap, the scheduler treats 
> > them as if they were truly synchronous tasks.
> 
> hm, why does it stay on zero?

Wakeup preemption.  Presuming here: heavy task wakes light task, is
preempted, light task stuffs data into pipe, heavy task doesn't block,
so no avg_overlap is ever computed.  The heavy task uses 100% CPU.

Running as SCHED_BATCH (virgin source), it becomes sane.

pipetest (6836, #threads: 1)
---------------------------------------------------------
se.exec_start                      :        266073.001296
se.vruntime                        :        173620.953443
se.sum_exec_runtime                :         11324.486321
se.avg_overlap                     :             1.306762
nr_switches                        :                  381
nr_voluntary_switches              :                    2
nr_involuntary_switches            :                  379
se.load.weight                     :                 1024
policy                             :                    3
prio                               :                  120
clock-delta                        :                  109

pipetest (6837, #threads: 1)
---------------------------------------------------------
se.exec_start                      :        266066.098182
se.vruntime                        :         51893.050177
se.sum_exec_runtime                :          2367.077751
se.avg_overlap                     :             0.077492
nr_switches                        :                  897
nr_voluntary_switches              :                  828
nr_involuntary_switches            :                   69
se.load.weight                     :                 1024
policy                             :                    3
prio                               :                  120
clock-delta                        :                  109

> >  static void dequeue_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int sleep)
> >  {
> > +	u64 limit = sysctl_sched_migration_cost;
> > +	u64 runtime = p->se.sum_exec_runtime - p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime;
> > +
> >  	if (sleep && p->se.last_wakeup) {
> >  		update_avg(&p->se.avg_overlap,
> >  			   p->se.sum_exec_runtime - p->se.last_wakeup);
> >  		p->se.last_wakeup = 0;
> > -	}
> > +	} else if (p->se.avg_overlap < limit && runtime >= limit)
> > +		update_avg(&p->se.avg_overlap, runtime);
> >  
> >  	sched_info_dequeued(p);
> >  	p->sched_class->dequeue_task(rq, p, sleep);
> 
> hm, that's weird. We want to limit avg_overlap maintenance to 
> true sleeps only.

Except that when we stop sleeping, we're left with a stale avg_overlap.

> And this patch only makes a difference in the !sleep case - 
> which shouldnt be that common in this workload.

Hack was only to kill the stale zero.  Let's forget hack ;-)

	-Mike


  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-08 16:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-07 17:47 scheduler oddity [bug?] Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-07 18:47 ` Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-08 19:45   ` Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-08 22:03     ` Willy Tarreau
2009-03-09  3:35       ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 11:19     ` David Newall
2009-03-08  9:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-08  9:58   ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-08 10:02     ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-08 10:19     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-08 13:35       ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-08 15:39     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-08 16:20       ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-03-08 17:52         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-08 18:39           ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-08 18:55             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-09  4:10               ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09  6:52                 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-09  8:02           ` [patch] " Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09  8:07             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-09 10:16               ` David Newall
2009-03-09 11:04               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-09 13:16                 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 13:27                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-09 13:51                     ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 14:00                     ` David Newall
2009-03-09 14:19                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-10  0:20                         ` David Newall
2009-03-09 13:37                   ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 13:46                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-09 13:58                       ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 14:11                         ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 14:41                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-09 15:30                             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-09 16:12                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-09 17:28                                 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-15 13:53                                   ` Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-15 17:16                                     ` Mike Galbraith
2009-03-15 18:57                                       ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-16 11:55                                         ` Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-09 15:57             ` Balazs Scheidler
2009-03-10  3:16               ` Mike Galbraith

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=1236529200.7110.16.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=bazsi@balabit.hu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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