From: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@codethink.co.uk>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Subject: Re: SCHED_DEADLINE tasks missing their deadline with SCHED_FLAG_RECLAIM jobs in the mix (using GRUB)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 15:36:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250624153633.6cb8dde8@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250620185248.634101cc@nowhere>
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 18:52:48 +0200
luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it> wrote:
[...]
> > > should be decreased by Ui when a task with utilization Ui
> > > becomes SCHED_DEADLINE (and increased by Ui when the
> > > SCHED_DEADLINE task terminates or changes scheduling policy).
> > > Since this value is per_core, Ui is divided by the number of
> > > cores in the root domain... From what you write, I guess extra_bw
> > > is not correctly initialized/updated when a new root domain is
> > > created?
> >
> > It looks like so yeah. After boot and when domains are dinamically
> > created. But, I am still not 100%, I only see weird numbers that I
> > struggle to relate with what you say above. :)
>
> BTW, when running some tests on different machines I think I found out
> that 6.11 does not exhibit this issue (this needs to be confirmed, I
> am working on reproducing the test with different kernels on the same
> machine)
>
> If I manage to reproduce this result, I think I can run a bisect to
> the commit introducing the issue (git is telling me that I'll need
> about 15 tests :)
> So, stay tuned...
It took more than I expected, but I think I found the guilty commit...
It seems to be
[5f6bd380c7bdbe10f7b4e8ddcceed60ce0714c6d] sched/rt: Remove default bandwidth control
Starting from this commit, I can reproduce the issue, but if I test the
previous commit (c8a85394cfdb4696b4e2f8a0f3066a1c921af426
sched/core: Fix picking of tasks for core scheduling with DL server)
the issue disappears.
Maybe this information can help in better understanding the problem :)
Luca
>
> > > All this information is probably not properly documented...
> > > Should I improve the description in
> > > Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.rst or do you prefer some
> > > comments in kernel/sched/deadline.c? (or .h?)
> >
> > I think ideally both. sched-deadline.rst should probably contain the
> > whole picture with more information and .c/.h the condendensed
> > version.
>
> OK, I'll try to do this in next week
>
>
> Thanks,
> Luca
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-24 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-28 18:04 SCHED_DEADLINE tasks missing their deadline with SCHED_FLAG_RECLAIM jobs in the mix (using GRUB) Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-02 13:55 ` Juri Lelli
2025-05-02 14:10 ` luca abeni
2025-05-03 13:14 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-05 15:53 ` luca abeni
2025-05-03 11:14 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-07 20:25 ` luca abeni
2025-05-19 13:32 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-20 16:09 ` luca abeni
2025-05-21 9:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-23 19:46 ` luca abeni
2025-05-25 19:29 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-29 9:39 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-02 14:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-17 12:21 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-18 11:24 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-20 9:29 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 9:37 ` luca abeni
2025-06-20 9:58 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 14:16 ` luca abeni
2025-06-20 15:28 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 16:52 ` luca abeni
2025-06-24 7:49 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-24 12:59 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-24 15:00 ` luca abeni
2025-06-25 9:30 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 10:11 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 12:50 ` luca abeni
2025-06-26 10:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-26 11:45 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 15:55 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-24 13:36 ` luca abeni [this message]
2025-05-30 9:21 ` luca abeni
2025-06-03 11:18 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-06 13:16 ` luca abeni
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=20250624153633.6cb8dde8@nowhere \
--to=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel.ziswiler@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vineeth@bitbyteword.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