From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@redhat.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
mgorman@techsingularity.net, vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/15] sched,fair: propagate sum_exec_runtime up the hierarchy
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 19:20:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1d631d5e-e606-4915-440f-fb00daa41fa5@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a35dd83b9ecadf4e136b588d7696a23e36ff2e9a.camel@surriel.com>
On 28/08/2019 15:14, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 09:51 +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 22/08/2019 04:17, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>> Now that enqueue_task_fair and dequeue_task_fair no longer iterate
>>> up
>>> the hierarchy all the time, a method to lazily propagate
>>> sum_exec_runtime
>>> up the hierarchy is necessary.
>>>
>>> Once a tick, propagate the newly accumulated exec_runtime up the
>>> hierarchy,
>>> and feed it into CFS bandwidth control.
>>>
>>> Remove the pointless call to account_cfs_rq_runtime from
>>> update_curr,
>>> which is always called with a root cfs_rq.
>>
>> But what about the call to account_cfs_rq_runtime() in
>> set_curr_task_fair()? Here you always call it with the root cfs_rq.
>> Shouldn't this be called also in a loop over all se's until !se-
>>> parent
>> (like in propagate_exec_runtime() further below).
>
> I believe that call should be only on the cgroup
> cfs_rq, with account_cfs_rq_runtime figuring out
> whether more runtime needs to be obtained from
> further up in the hierarchy.
So like this?
@@ -10248,7 +10248,8 @@ static void set_curr_task_fair(struct rq *rq)
set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se);
/* ensure bandwidth has been allocated on our new cfs_rq */
- account_cfs_rq_runtime(cfs_rq, 0);
+ if (task_se_in_cgroup(se))
+ account_cfs_rq_runtime(group_cfs_rq_of_parent(se), 0);
}
I fail to understand the second part of your sentence, and
how is this related to the code in propagate_exec_runtime():
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
propagate_exec_runtime() {
if (parent)
account_cfs_rq_runtime(cfs_rq, diff);
}
}
> By default we should probably work under the assumption
> that account_cfs_rq_runtime() will succeed at the current
> level, and no gymnastics are required to obtain CPU time.
Maybe this all will become clearer when the reworked CFS Bandwidth
support is ready ;-) I see this patch as the first part of it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-29 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-22 2:17 [PATCH RFC v4 0/15] sched,fair: flatten CPU controller runqueues Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 01/15] sched: introduce task_se_h_load helper Rik van Riel
2019-08-23 18:13 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-24 0:05 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 02/15] sched: change /proc/sched_debug fields Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 03/15] sched,fair: redefine runnable_load_avg as the sum of task_h_load Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 13:50 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-28 14:47 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 15:02 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 04/15] sched,fair: move runnable_load_avg to cfs_rq Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 05/15] sched,fair: remove cfs_rqs from leaf_cfs_rq_list bottom up Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 14:09 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 06/15] sched,cfs: use explicit cfs_rq of parent se helper Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 13:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-28 15:28 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 16:34 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 07/15] sched,cfs: fix zero length timeslice calculation Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 16:59 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 08/15] sched,fair: simplify timeslice length code Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 17:32 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-28 23:18 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-29 14:02 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-29 16:00 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-30 6:41 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-30 15:01 ` Rik van Riel
2019-09-02 7:51 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-09-02 17:47 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 09/15] sched,fair: refactor enqueue/dequeue_entity Rik van Riel
2019-09-03 15:38 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-09-03 20:27 ` Rik van Riel
2019-09-04 6:44 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 10/15] sched,fair: add helper functions for flattened runqueue Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 11/15] sched,fair: flatten hierarchical runqueues Rik van Riel
2019-08-23 18:14 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-24 1:16 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 12/15] sched,fair: flatten update_curr functionality Rik van Riel
2019-08-27 10:37 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 13/15] sched,fair: propagate sum_exec_runtime up the hierarchy Rik van Riel
2019-08-28 7:51 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-08-28 13:14 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-29 17:20 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2019-08-29 18:06 ` Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 14/15] sched,fair: ramp up task_se_h_weight quickly Rik van Riel
2019-08-22 2:17 ` [PATCH 15/15] sched,fair: scale vdiff in wakeup_preempt_entity Rik van Riel
2019-09-02 10:53 ` [PATCH RFC v4 0/15] sched,fair: flatten CPU controller runqueues Dietmar Eggemann
2019-09-03 1:44 ` Rik van Riel
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=1d631d5e-e606-4915-440f-fb00daa41fa5@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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