public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: byungchul.park@lge.com, mingo@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:43:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150930104343.GE2881@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150926131444.GA5507@lerouge>

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 03:14:45PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> > when the next tick occurs, update_process_times() -> scheduler_tick()
> > -> update_cpu_load_active() is performed, assuming the distance between
> > last tick and current tick is 1 tick! it's wrong in this case. thus,
> > this abnormal case should be considered in update_cpu_load_active().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/fair.c |    7 +++++--
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 4d5f97b..829282f 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -4356,12 +4356,15 @@ void update_cpu_load_nohz(void)
> >   */
> >  void update_cpu_load_active(struct rq *this_rq)
> >  {
> > +	unsigned long curr_jiffies = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
> > +	unsigned long pending_updates;
> >  	unsigned long load = weighted_cpuload(cpu_of(this_rq));
> >  	/*
> >  	 * See the mess around update_idle_cpu_load() / update_cpu_load_nohz().
> >  	 */
> > -	this_rq->last_load_update_tick = jiffies;
> > -	__update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, 1);
> > +	pending_updates = curr_jiffies - this_rq->last_load_update_tick;
> > +	this_rq->last_load_update_tick = curr_jiffies;
> > +	__update_cpu_load(this_rq, load, pending_updates);
> >  }
> 
> That's right but __update_cpu_load() doesn't handle correctly pending updates
> with non-zero loads. Currently, pending updates are wheeled through decay_load_missed()
> that assume it's all about idle load.
> 
> But in the cases you've enumerated, as well as in the nohz full case, missed pending
> updates can be about buzy loads.
> 
> I think we need to fix update_cpu_load() to handle that first, or your fix is
> going to make things worse.

Its worse than that, the whole call chain of update_process_times()
fully assumes a single tick, fixing just the one function deep down to
handle more than 1 tick is ass backwards.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-30 10:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-25  8:52 [RESEND PATCH] sched: consider missed ticks when updating global cpu load byungchul.park
2015-09-26 13:14 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-09-30 10:43   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-10-02  1:04     ` Byungchul Park
2015-10-02  0:43   ` Byungchul Park
2015-10-02  1:25     ` Byungchul Park

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=20150930104343.GE2881@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@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