public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@tuxonice.net>,
	stable@kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] sched: fix nr_uninterruptible accounting of frozen tasks really
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:31:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1247833910.15751.61.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090717122103.225652146@linutronix.de>

On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 12:25 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> plain text document attachment (freezer-fix-accounting-for-real.patch)
> commit e3c8ca8336 (sched: do not count frozen tasks toward load) broke
> the nr_uninterruptible accounting on freeze/thaw. On freeze the task
> is excluded from accounting with a check for (task->flags &
> PF_FROZEN), but that flag is cleared before the task is thawed. So
> while we prevent that the freezing task with state
> TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE is accounted to nr_uninterruptible we decrement
> nr_uninterruptible on thaw.
> 
> Use a separate flag which is handled by the freezing task itself. Set
> it before calling the scheduler with TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state and
> clear it after we return from frozen state.

Right, so I'm wondering why we don't fully revert e3c8ca8336 to begin
with.

The changelog reads:

---
commit e3c8ca8336707062f3f7cb1cd7e6b3c753baccdd
Author: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
Date:   Wed Apr 8 19:45:12 2009 -0500

    sched: do not count frozen tasks toward load

    Freezing tasks via the cgroup freezer causes the load average to climb
    because the freezer's current implementation puts frozen tasks in
    uninterruptible sleep (D state).

    Some applications which perform job-scheduling functions consult the
    load average when making decisions.  If a cgroup is frozen, the load
    average does not provide a useful measure of the system's utilization
    to such applications.  This is especially inconvenient if the job
    scheduler employs the cgroup freezer as a mechanism for preempting low
    priority jobs.  Contrast this with using SIGSTOP for the same purpose:
    the stopped tasks do not count toward system load.

    Change task_contributes_to_load() to return false if the task is
    frozen.  This results in /proc/loadavg behavior that better meets
    users' expectations.
---

It appears to me that a frozen cgroup is a transient state. Either you
would typically do something like:

  freeze -> {snapshot, migrate} -> {thaw, destroy}

Therefore a short increase in load doesn't seem like too big a problem,
its going to be gone soon anyway.

Hmm?

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-17 12:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-17 12:24 [patch 0/2] fix load average accounting Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-17 12:24 ` [patch 1/2] sched: fix load average accounting vs. cpu hotplug Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-17 12:25 ` [patch 2/2] sched: fix nr_uninterruptible accounting of frozen tasks really Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-17 12:31   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-07-17 12:48     ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-17 22:26       ` Nigel Cunningham
2009-07-17 15:22     ` Matt Helsley
2009-07-17 16:47       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-17 20:55         ` Nathan Lynch
2009-07-18 12:56           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-18 23:59             ` Nathan Lynch
2009-07-17 15:51   ` Matt Helsley
2009-07-17 15:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-17 16:20       ` Matt Helsley
2009-07-17 20:54   ` Nathan Lynch

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=1247833910.15751.61.camel@twins \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=matthltc@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nigel@tuxonice.net \
    --cc=ntl@pobox.com \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=stable@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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