From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Ankit Jain <ankitja@vmware.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, yury.norov@gmail.com,
linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, qyousef@layalina.io, pjt@google.com,
joshdon@google.com, bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, namit@vmware.com,
amakhalov@vmware.com, srinidhir@vmware.com,
vsirnapalli@vmware.com, vbrahmajosyula@vmware.com,
akaher@vmware.com, srivatsa@csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] cpumask: Randomly distribute the tasks within affinity mask
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:39:12 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZSZ7UOBupdHHB24h@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231011071925.761590-1-ankitja@vmware.com>
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:49:25PM +0530, Ankit Jain wrote:
> commit 46a87b3851f0 ("sched/core: Distribute tasks within affinity masks")
> and commit 14e292f8d453 ("sched,rt: Use cpumask_any*_distribute()")
> introduced the logic to distribute the tasks at initial wakeup on cpus
> where load balancing works poorly or disabled at all (isolated cpus).
>
> There are cases in which the distribution of tasks
> that are spawned on isolcpus does not happen properly.
> In production deployment, initial wakeup of tasks spawn from
> housekeeping cpus to isolcpus[nohz_full cpu] happens on first cpu
> within isolcpus range instead of distributed across isolcpus.
>
> Usage of distribute_cpu_mask_prev from one processes group,
> will clobber previous value of another or other groups and vice-versa.
>
> When housekeeping cpus spawn multiple child tasks to wakeup on
> isolcpus[nohz_full cpu], using cpusets.cpus/sched_setaffinity(),
> distribution is currently performed based on per-cpu
> distribute_cpu_mask_prev counter.
> At the same time, on housekeeping cpus there are percpu
> bounded timers interrupt/rcu threads and other system/user tasks
> would be running with affinity as housekeeping cpus. In a real-life
> environment, housekeeping cpus are much fewer and are too much loaded.
> So, distribute_cpu_mask_prev value from these tasks impacts
> the offset value for the tasks spawning to wakeup on isolcpus and
> thus most of the tasks end up waking up on first cpu within the
> isolcpus set.
>
> Steps to reproduce:
> Kernel cmdline parameters:
> isolcpus=2-5 skew_tick=1 nohz=on nohz_full=2-5
> rcu_nocbs=2-5 rcu_nocb_poll idle=poll irqaffinity=0-1
>
> * pid=$(echo $$)
> * taskset -pc 0 $pid
> * cat loop-normal.c
> int main(void)
> {
> while (1)
> ;
> return 0;
> }
> * gcc -o loop-normal loop-normal.c
> * for i in {1..50}; do ./loop-normal & done
> * pids=$(ps -a | grep loop-normal | cut -d' ' -f5)
> * for i in $pids; do taskset -pc 2-5 $i ; done
>
> Expected output:
> * All 50 “loop-normal” tasks should wake up on cpu2-5
> equally distributed.
> * ps -eLo cpuid,pid,tid,ppid,cls,psr,cls,cmd | grep "^ [2345]"
>
> Actual output:
> * All 50 “loop-normal” tasks got woken up on cpu2 only
>
> Analysis:
> There are percpu bounded timer interrupt/rcu threads activities
> going on every few microseconds on housekeeping cpus, exercising
> find_lowest_rq() -> cpumask_any_and_distribute()/cpumask_any_distribute()
> So, per cpu variable distribute_cpu_mask_prev for housekeeping cpus
> keep on getting set to housekeeping cpus. Bash/docker processes
> are sharing same per cpu variable as they run on housekeeping cpus.
> Thus intersection of clobbered distribute_cpu_mask_prev and
> new mask(isolcpus) return always first cpu within the new mask(isolcpus)
> in accordance to the logic mentioned in commits above.
>
> Fix the issue by using random cores out of the applicable CPU set
> instead of relying on distribute_cpu_mask_prev.
> Fixes: 46a87b3851f0 ("sched/core: Distribute tasks within affinity masks")
> Fixes: 14e292f8d453 ("sched,rt: Use cpumask_any*_distribute()")
>
Blank lines are not allowed in the tag block.
> Signed-off-by: Ankit Jain <ankitja@vmware.com>
...
> +/**
> + * Returns an arbitrary cpu within srcp.
> + *
> + * Iterated calls using the same srcp will be randomly distributed
> + */
This is invalid. Always run
scripts/kernel-doc -v -none -Wall ...
against the file of interest and fix all warnings and errors reported.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-11 10:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-11 7:19 [PATCH RFC] cpumask: Randomly distribute the tasks within affinity mask Ankit Jain
2023-10-11 10:39 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2023-10-11 10:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-11 11:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-11 13:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-11 23:55 ` Josh Don
2023-10-12 8:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-12 15:43 ` Ankit Jain
2023-10-12 0:16 ` Yury Norov
2023-10-12 15:52 ` Ankit Jain
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=ZSZ7UOBupdHHB24h@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akaher@vmware.com \
--cc=amakhalov@vmware.com \
--cc=ankitja@vmware.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=srinidhir@vmware.com \
--cc=srivatsa@csail.mit.edu \
--cc=vbrahmajosyula@vmware.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=vsirnapalli@vmware.com \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.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