[PATCH] O16int for interactivity

Con Kolivas
2003-08-15T16:35:00Z

[-- Attachment #1: clearsigned data --]
[-- Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2327 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This one took a lot of detective work to track down the scheduler starvation
issue seen rarely, but reproducibly with certain applications. Thanks Mike
Galbraith for significantly narrowing my search path.

In O15 I mentioned that preventing parents from preempting their children
prevented starvation of applications where they would be busy on wait. Long
story to describe how, but I discovered the problem inducing starvation in
O15 was the same, but with wakers and their wakee. The wakee would preempt
the waker, and the waker could make no progress until it got rescheduled...
however if the wakee had better priority than the waker it preempted it until
it's own priority dropped enough for the waker to get scheduled. Because in
O15 the priority decayed slower we were able to see this happening in these
"busy on wait" applications... and they're not as rare as we'd like. In fact
this wakee preemption is going on at a mild level all the time even in the
vanilla scheduler. I've experimented with ways to improve the
performance/feel of these applications but I found it was to the detriment of
most other apps, so this patch simply makes them run without inducing
starvation at usable performance. I'm not convinced the scheduler should have
a workaround, but that the apps shouldn't busy on wait.

Those who experienced starvation could you please test this patch.

Changes:
Waker is now kept track of.

Only user tasks have the bonus ceiling from uninterruptible sleep.

Preemption of tasks at the same level with twice as much timeslice has been
dropped as this is not necessary with timeslice granularity (may improve
performance of cpu intensive tasks).

Preemption of user tasks is limited to those in the interactive range; cpu
intensive non interactive tasks can run out their full timeslice (may also
improve cpu intensive performance)

Tasks cannot preempt their own waker.

Cleanups etc.

This patch applies onto 2.6.0-test3-mm2 (or O15int)
and is available at http://kernel.kolivas.org/2.5

Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PQD1ZUg7+tp6mRURAkObAJ45p2KLBA6lGFQ588PnSuE4yhrGXgCeOpTL
9bhnnGW6e8Pfn1BTHG/wbh8=
=EQ52
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[-- Attachment #2: patch-O15-O16int --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 6789 bytes --]

--- linux-2.6.0-test3-mm2/include/linux/sched.h 2003-08-13 21:45:15.000000000 +1000
+++ linux-2.6.0-test3-mm2-O16/include/linux/sched.h 2003-08-15 15:18:36.000000000 +1000
@@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ struct task_struct {
*/
struct task_struct *real_parent; /* real parent process (when being debugged) */
struct task_struct *parent; /* parent process */
+ struct task_struct *waker; /* waker process */
struct list_head children; /* list of my children */
struct list_head sibling; /* linkage in my parent's children list */
struct task_struct *group_leader;
--- linux-2.6.0-test3-mm2/kernel/sched.c 2003-08-13 21:45:15.000000000 +1000
+++ linux-2.6.0-test3-mm2-O16/kernel/sched.c 2003-08-16 01:11:54.000000000 +1000
@@ -117,6 +117,10 @@
* too hard.
*/

+#define CURRENT_BONUS(p) \
+ (NS_TO_JIFFIES((p)->sleep_avg) * MAX_BONUS / \
+ MAX_SLEEP_AVG)
+
#define SCALE(v1,v1_max,v2_max) \
(v1) * (v2_max) / (v1_max)

@@ -139,11 +143,6 @@
#define VARYING_CREDIT(p) \
(!(HIGH_CREDIT(p) || LOW_CREDIT(p)))

-#define TASK_PREEMPTS_CURR(p, rq) \
- ((p)->prio < (rq)->curr->prio || \
- ((p)->prio == (rq)->curr->prio && \
- (p)->time_slice > (rq)->curr->time_slice * 2))
-
/*
* BASE_TIMESLICE scales user-nice values [ -20 ... 19 ]
* to time slice values.
@@ -347,9 +346,7 @@ static int effective_prio(task_t *p)
if (rt_task(p))
return p->prio;

- bonus = MAX_USER_PRIO * PRIO_BONUS_RATIO *
- NS_TO_JIFFIES(p->sleep_avg) / MAX_SLEEP_AVG / 100;
- bonus -= MAX_USER_PRIO * PRIO_BONUS_RATIO / 100 / 2;
+ bonus = CURRENT_BONUS(p) - MAX_BONUS / 2;

prio = p->static_prio - bonus;
if (prio < MAX_RT_PRIO)
@@ -373,9 +370,6 @@ static void recalc_task_prio(task_t *p,
unsigned long long __sleep_time = now - p->timestamp;
unsigned long sleep_time;

- if (!p->sleep_avg && VARYING_CREDIT(p))
- p->interactive_credit--;
-
if (__sleep_time > NS_MAX_SLEEP_AVG)
sleep_time = NS_MAX_SLEEP_AVG;
else
@@ -397,9 +391,7 @@ static void recalc_task_prio(task_t *p,
* The lower the sleep avg a task has the more
* rapidly it will rise with sleep time.
*/
- sleep_time *= (MAX_BONUS + 1 -
- (NS_TO_JIFFIES(p->sleep_avg) *
- MAX_BONUS / MAX_SLEEP_AVG));
+ sleep_time *= (MAX_BONUS - CURRENT_BONUS(p)) ? : 1;

/*
* Tasks with low interactive_credit are limited to
@@ -412,9 +404,10 @@ static void recalc_task_prio(task_t *p,

/*
* Non high_credit tasks waking from uninterruptible
- * sleep are limited in their sleep_avg rise
+ * sleep are limited in their sleep_avg rise as they
+ * are likely to be waiting on I/O
*/
- if (!HIGH_CREDIT(p) && p->activated == -1){
+ if (p->activated == -1 && !HIGH_CREDIT(p) && p->mm){
if (p->sleep_avg >=
JIFFIES_TO_NS(JUST_INTERACTIVE_SLEEP(p)))
sleep_time = 0;
@@ -436,12 +429,6 @@ static void recalc_task_prio(task_t *p,
*/
p->sleep_avg += sleep_time;

- /*
- * 'Overflow' bonus ticks go to the waker as well, so the
- * ticks are not lost. This has the effect of further
- * boosting tasks that are related to maximum-interactive
- * tasks.
- */
if (p->sleep_avg > NS_MAX_SLEEP_AVG){
p->sleep_avg = NS_MAX_SLEEP_AVG;
p->interactive_credit += VARYING_CREDIT(p);
@@ -476,14 +463,22 @@ static inline void activate_task(task_t
* of time they spend on the runqueue, waiting for execution
* on a CPU, first time around:
*/
- if (in_interrupt())
+ if (in_interrupt()){
p->activated = 2;
- else
+ p->waker = p;
+ } else {
/*
* Normal first-time wakeups get a credit too for on-runqueue
* time, but it will be weighted down:
*/
p->activated = 1;
+ p->waker = current;
+ }
+ } else {
+ if (in_interrupt())
+ p->waker = p;
+ else
+ p->waker = current;
}

p->timestamp = now;
@@ -569,6 +564,21 @@ repeat:
}
#endif

+static inline int task_preempts_curr(task_t *p, runqueue_t *rq)
+{
+ if (p->prio < rq->curr->prio &&
+ ((TASK_INTERACTIVE(p) && p->mm) || !p->mm)) {
+ /*
+ * Prevent a task preempting it's own waker
+ * to avoid starvation
+ */
+ if (unlikely(rq->curr == p->waker))
+ return 0;
+ return 1;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
/***
* try_to_wake_up - wake up a thread
* @p: the to-be-woken-up thread
@@ -620,13 +630,8 @@ repeat_lock_task:
__activate_task(p, rq);
else {
activate_task(p, rq);
- /*
- * Parents are not allowed to preempt their
- * children
- */
- if (TASK_PREEMPTS_CURR(p, rq) &&
- p != rq->curr->parent)
- resched_task(rq->curr);
+ if (task_preempts_curr(p, rq))
+ resched_task(rq->curr);
}
success = 1;
}
@@ -665,7 +670,7 @@ int wake_up_state(task_t *p, unsigned in
*/
void wake_up_forked_process(task_t * p)
{
- unsigned long flags, sleep_avg;
+ unsigned long flags;
runqueue_t *rq = task_rq_lock(current, &flags);

p->state = TASK_RUNNING;
@@ -674,15 +679,13 @@ void wake_up_forked_process(task_t * p)
* and children as well, to keep max-interactive tasks
* from forking tasks that are max-interactive.
*/
- sleep_avg = NS_TO_JIFFIES(current->sleep_avg) * MAX_BONUS /
- MAX_SLEEP_AVG * PARENT_PENALTY / 100 *
- MAX_SLEEP_AVG / MAX_BONUS;
- current->sleep_avg = JIFFIES_TO_NS(sleep_avg);
-
- sleep_avg = NS_TO_JIFFIES(p->sleep_avg) * MAX_BONUS / MAX_SLEEP_AVG *
- CHILD_PENALTY / 100 * MAX_SLEEP_AVG / MAX_BONUS;
- p->sleep_avg = JIFFIES_TO_NS(sleep_avg);
+ current->sleep_avg = JIFFIES_TO_NS(CURRENT_BONUS(current) *
+ PARENT_PENALTY / 100 * MAX_SLEEP_AVG / MAX_BONUS);
+
+ p->sleep_avg = JIFFIES_TO_NS(CURRENT_BONUS(p) *
+ CHILD_PENALTY / 100 * MAX_SLEEP_AVG / MAX_BONUS);

+ p->waker = p->parent;
p->interactive_credit = 0;

p->prio = effective_prio(p);
@@ -1129,7 +1132,7 @@ static inline void pull_task(runqueue_t
* Note that idle threads have a prio of MAX_PRIO, for this test
* to be always true for them.
*/
- if (TASK_PREEMPTS_CURR(p, this_rq) && p != this_rq->curr->parent)
+ if (task_preempts_curr(p, this_rq))
set_need_resched();
}

@@ -1494,12 +1497,11 @@ need_resched:

/*
* Tasks with interactive credits get charged less run_time
- * as their sleep_avg decreases to slow them losing their
- * priority bonus
+ * at high sleep_avg to delay them losing their interactive
+ * status
*/
if (HIGH_CREDIT(prev))
- run_time /= ((NS_TO_JIFFIES(prev->sleep_avg) * MAX_BONUS /
- MAX_SLEEP_AVG) ? : 1);
+ run_time /= (CURRENT_BONUS(prev) ? : 1);

spin_lock_irq(&rq->lock);

@@ -1566,8 +1568,10 @@ switch_tasks:
RCU_qsctr(task_cpu(prev))++;

prev->sleep_avg -= run_time;
- if ((long)prev->sleep_avg < 0)
+ if ((long)prev->sleep_avg <= 0){
prev->sleep_avg = 0;
+ prev->interactive_credit -= VARYING_CREDIT(prev);
+ }
prev->timestamp = now;

if (likely(prev != next)) {