From: Valentin Schneider <Valentin.Schneider@arm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Vincent Donnefort <Vincent.Donnefort@arm.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix detection of per-CPU kthreads waking a task
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 11:16:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8735nkcwov.mognet@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDX8sOfguZhJt5QV3j5D_JetcgncuF2w+uLa0XDk7UXkw@mail.gmail.com>
On 25/11/21 10:05, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 16:42, Vincent Donnefort
> <vincent.donnefort@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> select_idle_sibling() will return prev_cpu for the case where the task is
>> woken up by a per-CPU kthread. However, the idle task has been recently
>> modified and is now identified by is_per_cpu_kthread(), breaking the
>> behaviour described above. Using !is_idle_task() ensures we do not
>> spuriously trigger that select_idle_sibling() exit path.
>>
>> Fixes: 00b89fe0197f ("sched: Make the idle task quack like a per-CPU kthread")
>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 945d987246c5..8bf95b0e368d 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -6399,6 +6399,7 @@ static int select_idle_sibling(struct task_struct *p, int prev, int target)
>> * pattern is IO completions.
>> */
>> if (is_per_cpu_kthread(current) &&
>> + !is_idle_task(current) &&
>> prev == smp_processor_id() &&
>> this_rq()->nr_running <= 1) {
>> return prev;
>
> AFAICT, this can't be possible for a symmetric system because it would
> have been already returned by other conditions.
> Only an asymmetric system can face such a situation if the task
> doesn't fit which is the subject of your other patch.
> so this patch seems irrelevant outside the other one
>
I think you can still hit this on a symmetric system; let me try to
reformulate my other email.
If this (non-patched) condition evaluates to true, it means the previous
condition
(available_idle_cpu(target) || sched_idle_cpu(target)) &&
asym_fits_capacity(task_util, target)
evaluated to false, so for a symmetric system target sure isn't idle.
prev == smp_processor_id() implies prev == target, IOW prev isn't
idle. Now, consider:
p0.prev = CPU1
p1.prev = CPU1
CPU0 CPU1
current = don't care current = swapper/1
ttwu(p1)
ttwu_queue(p1, CPU1)
// or
ttwu_queue_wakelist(p1, CPU1)
hrtimer_wakeup()
wake_up_process()
ttwu()
idle_cpu(CPU1)? no
is_per_cpu_kthread(current)? yes
prev == smp_processor_id()? yes
this_rq()->nr_running <= 1? yes
=> self enqueue
...
schedule_idle()
This works if CPU0 does either a full enqueue (rq->nr_running == 1) or just
a wakelist enqueue (rq->ttwu_pending > 0). If there was an idle CPU3
around, we'd still be stacking p0 and p1 onto CPU1.
IOW this opens a window between a remote ttwu() and the idle task invoking
schedule_idle() where the idle task can stack more tasks onto its CPU.
>
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-25 11:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-24 15:42 [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix detection of per-CPU kthreads waking a task Vincent Donnefort
2021-11-24 16:28 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-11-25 9:05 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-25 11:16 ` Valentin Schneider [this message]
2021-11-25 13:17 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-11-25 13:23 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-25 15:30 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-11-26 8:23 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-26 13:32 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-11-26 14:40 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-26 16:49 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-11-26 17:18 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-11-29 15:49 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-29 16:54 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-11-30 13:35 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2021-11-30 15:42 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-12-01 14:40 ` Vincent Donnefort
2021-12-01 16:19 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-11-29 8:36 ` [sched/fair] 8d0920b981: stress-ng.sem.ops_per_sec 11.9% improvement kernel test robot
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=8735nkcwov.mognet@arm.com \
--to=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=Vincent.Donnefort@arm.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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