public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
	sshegde@linux.ibm.com, srikar@linux.ibm.com,
	vineethr@linux.ibm.com, zhangqiao22@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Fix CPU bandwidth limit bypass during CPU hotplug
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 21:08:01 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z1hgWWpGjqFNxtjg@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241210144307.GV35539@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 03:43:07PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 03:53:47PM +0530, Vishal Chourasia wrote:
> > CPU controller limits are not properly enforced during CPU hotplug
> > operations, particularly during CPU offline. When a CPU goes offline,
> > throttled processes are unintentionally being unthrottled across all CPUs
> > in the system, allowing them to exceed their assigned quota limits.
> > 
> > Consider below for an example,
> > 
> > Assigning 6.25% bandwidth limit to a cgroup
> > in a 8 CPU system, where, workload is running 8 threads for 20 seconds at
> > 100% CPU utilization, expected (user+sys) time = 10 seconds.
> > 
> > $ cat /sys/fs/cgroup/test/cpu.max
> > 50000 100000
> > 
> > $ ./ebizzy -t 8 -S 20        // non-hotplug case
> > real 20.00 s
> > user 10.81 s                 // intended behaviour
> > sys   0.00 s
> > 
> > $ ./ebizzy -t 8 -S 20        // hotplug case
> > real 20.00 s
> > user 14.43 s                 // Workload is able to run for 14 secs
> > sys   0.00 s                 // when it should have only run for 10 secs
> > 
> > During CPU hotplug, scheduler domains are rebuilt and cpu_attach_domain
> > is called for every active CPU to update the root domain. That ends up
> > calling rq_offline_fair which un-throttles any throttled hierarchies.
> > 
> > Unthrottling should only occur for the CPU being hotplugged to allow its
> > throttled processes to become runnable and get migrated to other CPUs.
> > 
> > With current patch applied,
> > $ ./ebizzy -t 8 -S 20        // hotplug case
> > real 21.00 s
> > user 10.16 s                 // intended behaviour
> > sys   0.00 s
> > 
> > Note: hotplug operation (online, offline) was performed in while(1) loop
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>
> > Tested-by: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Did you mean this?
Yes, essentially this.
I will post another version.


>·· 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 2c4ebfc82917..b6afb8337e73 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -6696,6 +6696,9 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq)
>  
>  	lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
>  
> +	if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu_of(rq), cpu_active_mask))
> +		return;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * The rq clock has already been updated in the
>  	 * set_rq_offline(), so we should skip updating


What should be done for the case when the hotplugged CPU's cfs_rq has
plenty of runtime_remaining?

I have three choices
1) set it to 1 (no change required in current code)
2) skip reset, runtime_remaining will not be touched (similar to current patch)
3) return excess runtime to the global runtime (will require taking lock)

Thanks
- vishalc



      reply	other threads:[~2024-12-10 15:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-10 10:23 [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Fix CPU bandwidth limit bypass during CPU hotplug Vishal Chourasia
2024-12-10 11:31 ` Zhang Qiao
2024-12-10 14:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-12-10 15:38   ` Vishal Chourasia [this message]

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=Z1hgWWpGjqFNxtjg@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=vishalc@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=zhangqiao22@huawei.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