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
prev parent 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