From: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
To: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de, vschneid@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Sync se's load_avg with cfs_rq in reweight_task
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 10:12:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bc8e5905-7729-4263-84e2-ca86a710eccd@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d758614b-73e8-42a3-92d1-5d2424ee4e89@linux.ibm.com>
On 2024/7/24 07:00, Vishal Chourasia wrote:
> On 24/07/24 2:40 am, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 23/07/2024 17:48, Vishal Chourasia wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 07:42:47PM +0800, Chuyi Zhou wrote:
>>>> In reweight_task(), there are two situations:
>>>>
>>>> 1. The task was on_rq, then the task's load_avg is accurate because we
>>>> synchronized it with cfs_rq through update_load_avg() in dequeue_task().
>>>>
>>>> 2. The task is sleeping, its load_avg might not have been updated for some
>>>> time, which can result in inaccurate dequeue_load_avg() in
>>>> reweight_entity().
>>>>
>>>> This patch solves this by using sync_entity_load_avg() to synchronize the
>>>> load_avg of se with cfs_rq before dequeue_load_avg() in reweight_entity().
>>>> For tasks were on_rq, since we already update load_avg to accurate values
>>>> in dequeue_task(), this change will not have other effects due to the short
>>>> time interval between the two updates.
>>>>
>>>> Suggested-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>> - use sync_entity_load_avg() rather than update_load_avg() to sync the
>>>> sleeping task with its cfs_rq suggested by Dietmar.
>>>> - Link t0 v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240720051248.59608-1-zhouchuyi@bytedance.com/
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> - change the description in commit log.
>>>> - use update_load_avg() in reweight_task() rather than in reweight_entity
>>>> suggested by chengming.
>>>> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240716150840.23061-1-zhouchuyi@bytedance.com/
>>>> ---
>>>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>>>> index 9057584ec06d..da3cdd86ab2e 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>>>> @@ -3669,11 +3669,32 @@ dequeue_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
>>>> cfs_rq->avg.load_sum = max_t(u32, cfs_rq->avg.load_sum,
>>>> cfs_rq->avg.load_avg * PELT_MIN_DIVIDER);
>>>> }
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline u64 cfs_rq_last_update_time(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return u64_u32_load_copy(cfs_rq->avg.last_update_time,
>>>> + cfs_rq->last_update_time_copy);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Synchronize entity load avg of dequeued entity without locking
>>>> + * the previous rq.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static void sync_entity_load_avg(struct sched_entity *se)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
>>>> + u64 last_update_time;
>>>> +
>>>> + last_update_time = cfs_rq_last_update_time(cfs_rq);
>>>> + __update_load_avg_blocked_se(last_update_time, se);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>> The difference between using update_load_avg() and
>>> sync_entity_load_avg() is:
>>> 1. update_load_avg() uses the updated PELT clock value from the rq
>>> structure.
>>> 2. sync_entity_load_avg() uses the last updated time of
>>> the cfs_rq where the scheduling entity (se) is attached.
>>>
>>> Won't this affect the entity load sync?
>>
>> Not sure what you mean exactly by entity load sync here.
> load avg sync for the wakee
>>
>> The task has been sleeping for a long time, i.e. its PELT values haven't
>> been updated or a long time (its last_update_time (lut) value is pretty
>> old).
>>
>> In this meantime the task's cfs_rq has potentially seen other PELT
>> updates due to PELT updates of other non-sleeping tasks related to this
>> cfs_rq. I.e. the cfs_rq lut is much more recent.
>>
>> What we want to do here is to sync the sleeping task with its cfs_rq. If
>> the task was sleeping for more than 1us (1024ns) and we cross a 1ms PELT
>> period (1024us) when we use cfs_rq's lut as the 'now' value for
>> __update_load_avg_blocked_se() then we will see the task PELT values decay.
>>
>> We rely on sync_entity_load_avg() for instance in EAS wakeup where the
>> task's util_avg influences on which CPU type the task will run next. So
>> we sync the wakee with its cfs_rq to be able to work with a current task
>> util_avg.
> I was talking about the case where all the tasks on a cfs_rq are sleeping.
> In this case, lut of the cfs_rq will be same as, at the time of last dequeue.
In this case, cfs_rq is not on_rq, its load_sum/avg will be updated when
enqueue next time. (Or periodically updated from load balance)
>
> And, wakee is been woken up (suppose) after 1us window
>
>
> I guess, in this case pelt metric would not have changed for the cfs_rq
IMHO, so long as task_se load is synced with cfs_rq there should be ok.
Thanks.
>
> Thanks
> -- vishal.c
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-24 2:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-23 11:42 [PATCH v3] sched/fair: Sync se's load_avg with cfs_rq in reweight_task Chuyi Zhou
2024-07-23 15:48 ` Vishal Chourasia
2024-07-23 21:10 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-07-23 23:00 ` Vishal Chourasia
2024-07-24 2:12 ` Chengming Zhou [this message]
2024-07-24 9:06 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-07-24 2:08 ` Chengming Zhou
2024-07-24 6:20 ` Vishal Chourasia
2024-07-29 7:56 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-07-29 8:20 ` Chuyi Zhou
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=bc8e5905-7729-4263-84e2-ca86a710eccd@linux.dev \
--to=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--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=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vishalc@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=zhouchuyi@bytedance.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