public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: commit e9e9250b: sync wakeup bustage when waker is an RT task
Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 09:21:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1273994510.7873.10.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1273943222.8752.7.camel@marge.simson.net>

On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 19:07 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 14:04 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 13:57 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > Hi Peter,
> > > 
> > > This commit excluded RT tasks from rq->load, was that intentional?  The
> > > comment in struct rq states that load reflects *all* tasks, but since
> > > this commit, that's no longer true.
> > 
> > Right, because a static load value does not accurately reflect a RT task
> > which can run as long as it pretty well pleases. So instead we measure
> > the time spend running !fair tasks and scale down the cpu_power
> > proportionally.
> > 
> > > Looking at lmbench lat_udp in a PREEMPT_RT kernel, I noticed that
> > > wake_affine() is failing for sync wakeups when it should not.  It's
> > > doing so because the waker in this case is an RT kernel thread
> > > (sirq-net-rx) - we subtract the sync waker's weight, when it was never
> > > added in the first place, resulting in this_load going gaga.  End result
> > > is quite high latency numbers due to tasks jabbering cross-cache.
> > > 
> > > If the exclusion was intentional, I suppose I can do a waker class check
> > > in wake_affine() to fix it.
> > 
> > So basically make all RT wakeups sync?
> 
> I was going to just skip subtracting waker's weight ala
> 
>         /*
>          * If sync wakeup then subtract the (maximum possible)
>          * effect of the currently running task from the load
>          * of the current CPU:
>          */
> 	if (sync && !task_has_rt_policy(curr))

One-liner doesn't work.  We have one task on the cfs_rq, the one who is
the waker in !PREEMPT_RT, which is a fail case for wake_affine() if you
don't do the weight subtraction.  I did the below instead.

sched: RT waker sync wakeup bugfix

An RT waker's weight is not on the runqueue, but we try to subrtact it anyway
in the sync wakeup case,  sending this_load negative.  This leads to affine
wakeup failure in cases where it should succeed.  This was found while testing
an PREEMPT_RT kernel with lmbench's lat_udp.  In a PREEMPT_RT kernel, softirq
threads act as a ~proxy for the !RT buddy.  Approximate !PREEMPT_RT sync wakeup
behavior by looking at the buddy instead, and subtracting the maximum task weight
that will not send this_load negative.

Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
LKML-Reference: <new-submission>

 kernel/sched_fair.c |    9 +++++++++
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
index 5240469..cc40849 100644
--- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
@@ -1280,6 +1280,15 @@ static int wake_affine(struct sched_domain *sd, struct task_struct *p, int sync)
 		tg = task_group(current);
 		weight = current->se.load.weight;
 
+		/*
+		 * An RT waker's weight is not on the runqueue.  Subtract the
+		 * maximum task weight that will not send this_load negative.
+		 */
+		if (task_has_rt_policy(current)) {
+			weight = max_t(unsigned long, NICE_0_LOAD, p->se.load.weight);
+			weight = min(weight, this_load);
+		}
+
 		this_load += effective_load(tg, this_cpu, -weight, -weight);
 		load += effective_load(tg, prev_cpu, 0, -weight);
 	}



  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-05-16  7:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-15 11:57 commit e9e9250b: sync wakeup bustage when waker is an RT task Mike Galbraith
2010-05-15 12:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-15 17:07   ` Mike Galbraith
2010-05-15 17:32     ` Mike Galbraith
2010-05-16  7:21     ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2010-05-17  4:38       ` Mike Galbraith
2010-05-17  8:49         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-17  8:52           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-17  9:04           ` Mike Galbraith
2010-05-31 11:56       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-31 13:56         ` Mike Galbraith
2010-05-31 14:28           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-31 18:03             ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-01  6:40               ` Mike Galbraith
2010-06-01  9:12             ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix wake_affine() vs RT tasks tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra

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=1273994510.7873.10.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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