linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Lu <ziqianlu@bytedance.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Xi Wang <xii@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
	Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
	Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] sched/fair: Take care of group/affinity/sched_class change for throttled task
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 20:49:43 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250522124840.GC672414@bytedance> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250522120336.GI39944@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 02:03:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 06:41:07PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > On task group change, for tasks whose on_rq equals to TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED,
> > core will dequeue it and then requeued it.
> > 
> > The throttled task is still considered as queued by core because p->on_rq
> > is still set so core will dequeue it, but since the task is already
> > dequeued on throttle in fair, handle this case properly.
> > 
> > Affinity and sched class change is similar.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <ziqianlu@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/sched/fair.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index 74bc320cbc238..4c66fd8d24389 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -5866,6 +5866,10 @@ static void throttle_cfs_rq_work(struct callback_head *work)
> >  		update_rq_clock(rq);
> >  		WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&p->throttle_node));
> >  		dequeue_task_fair(rq, p, DEQUEUE_SLEEP | DEQUEUE_SPECIAL);
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Must not add it to limbo list before dequeue or dequeue will
> > +		 * mistakenly regard this task as an already throttled one.
> > +		 */
> >  		list_add(&p->throttle_node, &cfs_rq->throttled_limbo_list);
> >  		resched_curr(rq);
> >  	}
> > @@ -5881,6 +5885,20 @@ void init_cfs_throttle_work(struct task_struct *p)
> >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p->throttle_node);
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void dequeue_throttled_task(struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> > +{
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Task is throttled and someone wants to dequeue it again:
> > +	 * it must be sched/core when core needs to do things like
> > +	 * task affinity change, task group change, task sched class
> > +	 * change etc.
> > +	 */
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(p->se.on_rq);
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(flags & DEQUEUE_SLEEP);
> > +
> > +	list_del_init(&p->throttle_node);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static void enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags);
> >  static int tg_unthrottle_up(struct task_group *tg, void *data)
> >  {
> > @@ -6834,6 +6852,7 @@ static inline void sync_throttle(struct task_group *tg, int cpu) {}
> >  static __always_inline void return_cfs_rq_runtime(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq) {}
> >  static void task_throttle_setup_work(struct task_struct *p) {}
> >  static bool task_is_throttled(struct task_struct *p) { return false; }
> > +static void dequeue_throttled_task(struct task_struct *p, int flags) {}
> >  
> >  static inline int cfs_rq_throttled(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> >  {
> > @@ -7281,6 +7300,11 @@ static int dequeue_entities(struct rq *rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
> >   */
> >  static bool dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> >  {
> > +	if (unlikely(task_is_throttled(p))) {
> > +		dequeue_throttled_task(p, flags);
> > +		return true;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	if (!(p->se.sched_delayed && (task_on_rq_migrating(p) || (flags & DEQUEUE_SAVE))))
> >  		util_est_dequeue(&rq->cfs, p);
> 
> This is asymmetric -- dequeue removes it from that throttle list, but
> the corresponding enqueue will not add it back, what gives?
> 
> Because now we have:
> 
>  p->on_rq=1
>  p->throttle_node on list
> 
> move_queued_task()
>   deactivate_task()
>     dequeue_task_fair()
>       list_del_init(throttle_node)
>     p->on_rq = 2
> 
>   activate_task()
>     enqueue_task_fair()
>       // nothing special, makes the thing runnable
>     p->on_rq = 1;
> 
> and we exit with a task that is on-rq and not throttled ?!?
>
> Why is this? Are we relying on pick_task_fair() to dequeue it again and
> fix up our inconsistencies? If so, that had better have a comment on.

Correct.

Does the following comment look OK?

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 89afa472299b7..4f4d64cf31fb1 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -7147,6 +7147,10 @@ static int dequeue_entities(struct rq *rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
 static bool dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
 {
 	if (unlikely(task_is_throttled(p))) {
+		/*
+		 * Task migrated to new rq will have its throttle work
+		 * added if necessary in pick time.
+		 */
 		dequeue_throttled_task(p, flags);
 		return true;
 	}

  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-22 12:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-20 10:41 [PATCH 0/7] Defer throttle when task exits to user Aaron Lu
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 1/7] sched/fair: Add related data structure for task based throttle Aaron Lu
2025-05-21  8:48   ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 2/7] sched/fair: prepare throttle path " Aaron Lu
2025-05-20 12:02   ` Florian Bezdeka
2025-05-21  6:37     ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-21 11:51       ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-21  9:01   ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-21  9:21     ` [External] " Aaron Lu
2025-05-22 11:43       ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-23  8:03         ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-22 10:48   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-22 11:44     ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-22 11:54       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-22 12:40         ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-23  9:53           ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-23 10:52             ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-23 11:17               ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-22 11:07   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-23  7:40     ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-29 11:51       ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-30  5:36         ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-05-30 11:02           ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-23 12:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 3/7] sched/fair: prepare unthrottle " Aaron Lu
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 4/7] sched/fair: Take care of group/affinity/sched_class change for throttled task Aaron Lu
2025-05-22 12:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-22 12:49     ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2025-05-23 14:59       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-26 11:36         ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-27  6:58           ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-27 11:19             ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-05-27 11:54               ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-27 14:16                 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-05-23  2:43   ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-23  7:56     ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-23  9:13       ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-23  9:42         ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-23  9:53           ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-23 11:59             ` Aaron Lu
2025-05-26 13:14               ` Chengming Zhou
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 5/7] sched/fair: switch to task based throttle model Aaron Lu
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 6/7] sched/fair: task based throttle time accounting Aaron Lu
2025-05-20 10:41 ` [PATCH 7/7] sched/fair: get rid of throttled_lb_pair() Aaron Lu

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=20250522124840.GC672414@bytedance \
    --to=ziqianlu@bytedance.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=florian.bezdeka@siemens.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=joshdon@google.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=xii@google.com \
    --cc=zhouchuyi@bytedance.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).