From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched_rt: fix overload bug on rt group scheduling
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 07:21:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49D49FB6.3000101@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1238654901.8530.5373.camel@twins>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3890 bytes --]
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 20:58 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>>> Fixes an easily triggerable BUG() when setting process affinities.
>>>
>>> Make sure to count the number of migratable tasks in the same place:
>>> the root rt_rq. Otherwise the number doesn't make sense and we'll hit
>>> the BUG in set_cpus_allowed_rt().
>>>
>>> Also, make sure we only count tasks, not groups (this is probably
>>> already taken care of by the fact that rt_se->nr_cpus_allowed will be 0
>>> for groups, but be more explicit)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
>>> Tested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>> CC: stable@kernel.org
>>> ---
>>> kernel/sched_rt.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
>>> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched_rt.c b/kernel/sched_rt.c
>>> index de4469a..c1ee8dc 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched_rt.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched_rt.c
>>> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ static inline struct task_struct *rt_task_of(struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se)
>>>
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED
>>>
>>> +#define rt_entity_is_task(rt_se) (!(rt_se)->my_q)
>>> +
>>> static inline struct rq *rq_of_rt_rq(struct rt_rq *rt_rq)
>>> {
>>> return rt_rq->rq;
>>> @@ -22,6 +24,8 @@ static inline struct rt_rq *rt_rq_of_se(struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se)
>>>
>>> #else /* CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED */
>>>
>>> +#define rt_entity_is_task(rt_se) (1)
>>> +
>>> static inline struct rq *rq_of_rt_rq(struct rt_rq *rt_rq)
>>> {
>>> return container_of(rt_rq, struct rq, rt);
>>> @@ -73,7 +77,7 @@ static inline void rt_clear_overload(struct rq *rq)
>>>
>>> static void update_rt_migration(struct rt_rq *rt_rq)
>>> {
>>> - if (rt_rq->rt_nr_migratory && (rt_rq->rt_nr_running > 1)) {
>>> + if (rt_rq->rt_nr_migratory > 1) {
>>>
>>>
>> The rest of the patch is making sense to me, but I am a little concerned
>> about this change.
>>
>> The original logic was designed to catch the condition when you might
>> have a non-migratory task running, and a migratory task queued. This
>> would mean nr_running == 2, and nr_migratory == 1, which is eligible for
>> overload handling. (Of course, the opposite could be true..the
>> migratory is running and the non-migratory is queued...we cannot discern
>> the difference here and we go into overload anyway. This is just
>> suboptimal but functionally correct).
>>
>> What can happen now is you could have that above condition but we will
>> not go into overload unless there is at least two migratory tasks
>> queued. This will undoubtedly allow a potential scheduling latency on
>> task #2.
>>
>> I think we really need to qualify overload on both running > 1 and at
>> least one migratory task. Is there a way to get this state, even if by
>> other means?
>>
>
> Ah, yes, I missed that bit. I ripped out the rt_nr_running because I 1)
> didn't think of this, and 2) rt_nr_running is accounted per rt_rq, not
> per-cpu, so it doesn't match.
>
> Since rt_nr_running is also used in a per rt_rq setting, changing that
> isn't possible and we'd need to introduce another per-cpu variant is you
> want to re-instate this.
>
Yeah, I actually don't care if its literally a nr_running stat
reinstated, or some other way to restore "correctness" ;)
Double bonus if you can solve that problem I mentioned above where I
can't tell if its really eligible for overload in all cases (but goes
into overload anyway to be conservative). I had been thinking of doing
something like subtracting the nr_migration number when a migratory task
is put on the cpu. But this is kind of messy because you need to handle
all the places that can manipulate nr_migratory to make sure it doesnt
break.
Thanks Peter!
-Greg
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-02 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-01 16:40 [PATCH] sched_rt: fix overload bug on rt group scheduling Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-02 0:58 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-04-02 6:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-02 11:21 ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2009-07-08 15:37 ` [PATCH] sched_rt: fix overload bug on rt group scheduling -v2 Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-08 15:54 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-10 4:05 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-10 10:41 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched_rt: Fix overload bug on rt group scheduling tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=49D49FB6.3000101@novell.com \
--to=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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