From: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com, ankur.a.arora@oracle.com, efault@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] sched: Add Lazy preemption model
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 22:43:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877cajdu8x.fsf@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241007075055.331243614@infradead.org>
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
> Change fair to use resched_curr_lazy(), which, when the lazy
> preemption model is selected, will set TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY.
>
> This LAZY bit will be promoted to the full NEED_RESCHED bit on tick.
> As such, the average delay between setting LAZY and actually
> rescheduling will be TICK_NSEC/2.
>
> In short, Lazy preemption will delay preemption for fair class but
> will function as Full preemption for all the other classes, most
> notably the realtime (RR/FIFO/DEADLINE) classes.
>
> The goal is to bridge the performance gap with Voluntary, such that we
> might eventually remove that option entirely.
>
> Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
> include/linux/preempt.h | 8 ++++-
> kernel/Kconfig.preempt | 15 +++++++++
> kernel/sched/core.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> kernel/sched/debug.c | 5 +--
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 6 +--
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 1
> 6 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/include/linux/preempt.h
> +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
> @@ -486,6 +486,7 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(migrate, migrate_dis
> extern bool preempt_model_none(void);
> extern bool preempt_model_voluntary(void);
> extern bool preempt_model_full(void);
> +extern bool preempt_model_lazy(void);
>
> #else
>
> @@ -502,6 +503,11 @@ static inline bool preempt_model_full(vo
> return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT);
> }
>
> +static inline bool preempt_model_lazy(void)
> +{
> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_LAZY);
> +}
> +
> #endif
>
> static inline bool preempt_model_rt(void)
> @@ -519,7 +525,7 @@ static inline bool preempt_model_rt(void
> */
> static inline bool preempt_model_preemptible(void)
> {
> - return preempt_model_full() || preempt_model_rt();
> + return preempt_model_full() || preempt_model_lazy() || preempt_model_rt();
> }
In addition to preempt_model_preemptible() we probably also need
static inline bool preempt_model_minimize_latency(void)
{
return preempt_model_full() || preempt_model_rt();
}
for spin_needbreak()/rwlock_needbreak().
That would make the behaviour of spin_needbreak() under the lazy model
similar to none/voluntary.
> #endif /* __LINUX_PREEMPT_H */
> --- a/kernel/Kconfig.preempt
> +++ b/kernel/Kconfig.preempt
> @@ -11,6 +11,9 @@ config PREEMPT_BUILD
> select PREEMPTION
> select UNINLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK if !ARCH_INLINE_SPIN_UNLOCK
>
> +config ARCH_HAS_PREEMPT_LAZY
> + bool
> +
> choice
> prompt "Preemption Model"
> default PREEMPT_NONE
> @@ -67,6 +70,18 @@ config PREEMPT
> embedded system with latency requirements in the milliseconds
> range.
>
> +config PREEMPT_LAZY
> + bool "Scheduler controlled preemption model"
> + depends on !ARCH_NO_PREEMPT
> + depends on ARCH_HAS_PREEMPT_LAZY
> + select PREEMPT_BUILD
> + help
> + This option provides a scheduler driven preemption model that
> + is fundamentally similar to full preemption, but is less
> + eager to preempt SCHED_NORMAL tasks in an attempt to
> + reduce lock holder preemption and recover some of the performance
> + gains seen from using Voluntary preemption.
> +
> config PREEMPT_RT
> bool "Fully Preemptible Kernel (Real-Time)"
> depends on EXPERT && ARCH_SUPPORTS_RT
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -1078,6 +1078,9 @@ static void __resched_curr(struct rq *rq
>
> lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
>
> + if (is_idle_task(curr) && tif == TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY)
> + tif = TIF_NEED_RESCHED;
> +
Tasks with idle policy get handled at the usual user space boundary.
Maybe a comment reflecting that?
> if (cti->flags & ((1 << tif) | _TIF_NEED_RESCHED))
> return;
>
> @@ -1103,6 +1106,32 @@ void resched_curr(struct rq *rq)
> __resched_curr(rq, TIF_NEED_RESCHED);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> +static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(sk_dynamic_preempt_lazy);
> +static __always_inline bool dynamic_preempt_lazy(void)
> +{
> + return static_branch_unlikely(&sk_dynamic_preempt_lazy);
> +}
> +#else
> +static __always_inline bool dynamic_preempt_lazy(void)
> +{
> + return IS_ENABLED(PREEMPT_LAZY);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +static __always_inline int tif_need_resched_lazy(void)
> +{
> + if (dynamic_preempt_lazy())
> + return TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY;
> +
> + return TIF_NEED_RESCHED;
> +}
Nice. This simplifies things.
> +void resched_curr_lazy(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> + __resched_curr(rq, tif_need_resched_lazy());
> +}
> +
> void resched_cpu(int cpu)
> {
> struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> @@ -5598,6 +5627,10 @@ void sched_tick(void)
> update_rq_clock(rq);
> hw_pressure = arch_scale_hw_pressure(cpu_of(rq));
> update_hw_load_avg(rq_clock_task(rq), rq, hw_pressure);
> +
> + if (dynamic_preempt_lazy() && tif_test_bit(TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY))
> + resched_curr(rq);
> +
So this works for SCHED_NORMAL. But, does this do the right thing for
deadline etc other scheduling classes?
--
ankur
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 5:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-07 7:46 [PATCH 0/5] sched: Lazy preemption muck Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-07 7:46 ` [PATCH 1/5] sched: Add TIF_NEED_RESCHED_LAZY infrastructure Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-09 12:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-09 13:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-06 10:48 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-07 7:46 ` [PATCH 2/5] sched: Add Lazy preemption model Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-08 5:43 ` Ankur Arora [this message]
2024-10-08 14:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-09 8:50 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-09 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-09 9:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-15 14:37 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2024-10-25 10:42 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-22 16:44 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2024-10-25 13:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-29 18:57 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2024-11-06 10:48 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-07 7:46 ` [PATCH 3/5] sched: Enable PREEMPT_DYNAMIC for PREEMPT_RT Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-08 13:24 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-08 14:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-10 6:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-10-10 7:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-06 10:48 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-07 7:46 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched, x86: Enable Lazy preemption Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-06 10:48 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-07 7:46 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched: Add laziest preempt model Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-08 5:59 ` Ankur Arora
2024-10-08 14:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-08 14:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-08 15:07 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-07 8:33 ` [PATCH 0/5] sched: Lazy preemption muck Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-08 4:58 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-10-08 15:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-09 4:40 ` Ankur Arora
2024-10-09 6:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-09 7:23 ` Ankur Arora
2024-10-09 8:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-09 8:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-09 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-09 20:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-09 20:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-09 21:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-09 21:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-09 23:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-09 23:29 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-10 1:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-10 10:23 ` David Laight
2024-10-13 19:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-14 8:21 ` David Laight
2024-10-10 3:12 ` Tianchen Ding
2024-10-10 7:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-09 7:30 ` Ankur Arora
2024-10-09 7:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-09 11:07 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-10-17 12:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-11-07 17:21 ` Thomas Meyer
2024-11-08 0:59 ` Mike Galbraith
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=877cajdu8x.fsf@oracle.com \
--to=ankur.a.arora@oracle.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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