public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
To: qianjun.kernel@gmail.com
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, will@kernel.org,
	luto@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	laoar.shao@gmail.com, urezki@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] Softirq:avoid large sched delay from the pending softirqs
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 16:55:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200724145500.GA31254@pc636> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1595601083-10183-1-git-send-email-qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:31:23AM -0400, qianjun.kernel@gmail.com wrote:
> From: jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
> 
> When get the pending softirqs, it need to process all the pending
> softirqs in the while loop. If the processing time of each pending
> softirq is need more than 2 msec in this loop, or one of the softirq
> will running a long time, according to the original code logic, it
> will process all the pending softirqs without wakeuping ksoftirqd,
> which will cause a relatively large scheduling delay on the
> corresponding CPU, which we do not wish to see. The patch will check
> the total time to process pending softirq, if the time exceeds 2 ms
> we need to wakeup the ksofirqd to aviod large sched delay.
> 
> Signed-off-by: jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
> ---
>  kernel/softirq.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
> index c4201b7f..d572ce4 100644
> --- a/kernel/softirq.c
> +++ b/kernel/softirq.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  #include <linux/smpboot.h>
>  #include <linux/tick.h>
>  #include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
>  
>  #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
>  #include <trace/events/irq.h>
> @@ -200,17 +201,15 @@ void __local_bh_enable_ip(unsigned long ip, unsigned int cnt)
>  /*
>   * We restart softirq processing for at most MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART times,
>   * but break the loop if need_resched() is set or after 2 ms.
> - * The MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME provides a nice upper bound in most cases, but in
> - * certain cases, such as stop_machine(), jiffies may cease to
> - * increment and so we need the MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART limit as
> - * well to make sure we eventually return from this method.
> + * In the loop, if the processing time of the softirq has exceeded 2
> + * milliseconds, we also need to break the loop to wakeup the ksofirqd.
>   *
>   * These limits have been established via experimentation.
>   * The two things to balance is latency against fairness -
>   * we want to handle softirqs as soon as possible, but they
>   * should not be able to lock up the box.
>   */
> -#define MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME  msecs_to_jiffies(2)
> +#define MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME_NS 2000000
>  #define MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART 10
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS
> @@ -248,7 +247,7 @@ static inline void lockdep_softirq_end(bool in_hardirq) { }
>  
>  asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
>  {
> -	unsigned long end = jiffies + MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME;
> +	u64 end = sched_clock() + MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME_NS;
>  	unsigned long old_flags = current->flags;
>  	int max_restart = MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART;
>  	struct softirq_action *h;
> @@ -299,6 +298,19 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
>  		}
>  		h++;
>  		pending >>= softirq_bit;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * the softirq's action has been running for too much time
> +		 * so it may need to wakeup the ksoftirqd
> +		 */
> +		if (need_resched() && sched_clock() > end) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Ensure that the remaining pending bits are
> +			 * handled.
> +			 */
> +			or_softirq_pending(pending << (vec_nr + 1));
> +			break;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	if (__this_cpu_read(ksoftirqd) == current)
> @@ -307,8 +319,8 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
>  
>  	pending = local_softirq_pending();
>  	if (pending) {
> -		if (time_before(jiffies, end) && !need_resched() &&
> -		    --max_restart)
> +		if (!need_resched() && --max_restart &&
> +		    sched_clock() <= end)
>  			goto restart;
>  
>  		wakeup_softirqd();
> 
To me it looks OKr.

Thank you for fixing the "2 msec resolution case".

--
Vlad Rezki

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-24 14:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-24 14:31 [PATCH V4] Softirq:avoid large sched delay from the pending softirqs qianjun.kernel
2020-07-24 14:55 ` Uladzislau Rezki [this message]
2020-07-27 15:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-07-28  1:35   ` jun qian
2020-07-28 14:02   ` jun qian
2020-07-29 12:16     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-07-29 12:51       ` jun qian
2020-09-09  8:32       ` jun qian
2020-09-15  2:09   ` jun qian

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=20200724145500.GA31254@pc636 \
    --to=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qianjun.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.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