From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
sched-ext@meta.com, Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>,
Changwoo Min <multics69@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.13 1/2] sched_ext: Avoid live-locking bypass mode switching
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:03:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241105220346.GA64119@maniforge> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZyqSm4B4NuzuHEbp@slm.duckdns.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2444 bytes --]
On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 11:48:11AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
[...]
> static bool consume_dispatch_q(struct rq *rq, struct scx_dispatch_q *dsq)
> {
> struct task_struct *p;
> retry:
> /*
> + * This retry loop can repeatedly race against scx_ops_bypass()
> + * dequeueing tasks from @dsq trying to put the system into the bypass
> + * mode. On some multi-socket machines (e.g. 2x Intel 8480c), this can
> + * live-lock the machine into soft lockups. Give a breather.
> + */
> + scx_ops_breather(rq);
Should we move this to after the list_empty() check? Or before the goto retry
below so we can avoid having to do the atomic read on the typical hotpath?
> +
> + /*
> * The caller can't expect to successfully consume a task if the task's
> * addition to @dsq isn't guaranteed to be visible somehow. Test
> * @dsq->list without locking and skip if it seems empty.
> @@ -4550,10 +4587,11 @@ bool task_should_scx(struct task_struct
> */
> static void scx_ops_bypass(bool bypass)
> {
> + static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(bypass_lock);
> int cpu;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&__scx_ops_bypass_lock, flags);
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&bypass_lock, flags);
> if (bypass) {
> scx_ops_bypass_depth++;
> WARN_ON_ONCE(scx_ops_bypass_depth <= 0);
> @@ -4566,6 +4604,8 @@ static void scx_ops_bypass(bool bypass)
> goto unlock;
> }
>
> + atomic_inc(&scx_ops_breather_depth);
> +
> /*
> * No task property is changing. We just need to make sure all currently
> * queued tasks are re-queued according to the new scx_rq_bypassing()
> @@ -4621,8 +4661,10 @@ static void scx_ops_bypass(bool bypass)
> /* resched to restore ticks and idle state */
> resched_cpu(cpu);
> }
> +
> + atomic_dec(&scx_ops_breather_depth);
> unlock:
> - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&__scx_ops_bypass_lock, flags);
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bypass_lock, flags);
> }
>
> static void free_exit_info(struct scx_exit_info *ei)
> @@ -6275,6 +6317,13 @@ static bool scx_dispatch_from_dsq(struct
> raw_spin_rq_lock(src_rq);
> }
>
> + /*
> + * If the BPF scheduler keeps calling this function repeatedly, it can
> + * cause similar live-lock conditions as consume_dispatch_q(). Insert a
> + * breather if necessary.
> + */
> + scx_ops_breather(src_rq);
> +
> locked_rq = src_rq;
> raw_spin_lock(&src_dsq->lock);
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-05 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-05 21:48 [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.13 1/2] sched_ext: Avoid live-locking bypass mode switching Tejun Heo
2024-11-05 21:49 ` [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.13 2/2] sched_ext: Enable the ops breather and eject BPF scheduler on softlockup Tejun Heo
2024-11-06 21:32 ` Doug Anderson
2024-11-06 22:08 ` Tejun Heo
2024-11-06 23:02 ` Doug Anderson
2024-11-06 23:07 ` Tejun Heo
2024-11-06 23:20 ` Doug Anderson
2024-11-07 19:31 ` Tejun Heo
2024-11-08 20:38 ` Tejun Heo
2024-11-05 22:03 ` David Vernet [this message]
2024-11-05 23:02 ` [PATCH sched_ext/for-6.13 1/2] sched_ext: Avoid live-locking bypass mode switching Tejun Heo
2024-11-05 23:57 ` Andrea Righi
2024-11-06 0:26 ` Tejun Heo
2024-11-06 0:33 ` Andrea Righi
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=20241105220346.GA64119@maniforge \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=multics69@gmail.com \
--cc=sched-ext@meta.com \
--cc=tj@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