The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
To: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>,
	Tianchen Ding <dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"open list:SCHEDULER" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Fix premature check of WAKEUP_PREEMPTION
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 23:46:48 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e1cfabab-1326-4cd8-a8a4-4b3fc4c1f7ec@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6097164a-aa99-4869-b666-9dc7018c1f96@bytedance.com>

On 21/02/25 21:27, Abel Wu wrote:
> On 2/21/25 7:49 PM, Vincent Guittot Wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 at 12:12, Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Idle tasks are by definition preempted by non-idle tasks whether feat
>>> WAKEUP_PREEMPTION is enabled or not. This isn't true any longer since
>>
>> I don't think it's true, only "sched_idle never preempts others" is
>> always true but sched_feat(WAKEUP_PREEMPTION) is mainly there for
>> debug purpose so if WAKEUP_PREEMPTION is false then nobody preempts
>> others at wakeup, idle, batch or normal
> 
> Hi Vincent, thanks for your comment!
> 
> The SCHED_IDLE "definition" of being preempted by non-idle tasks comes
> from commit 6bc912b71b6f ("sched: SCHED_OTHER vs SCHED_IDLE isolation")
> which said:
> 
>     - no SCHED_IDLE buddies
>     - never let SCHED_IDLE preempt on wakeup
>     - always preempt SCHED_IDLE on wakeup
>     - limit SLEEPER fairness for SCHED_IDLE
> 
> and that commit let it be preempted before checking WAKEUP_PREEMPTION.
> The rules were introduced in 2009, and to the best of my knowledge there
> seemed no behavior change ever since. Please correct me if I missed
> anything.

As Vincent mentioned, WAKEUP_PREEMPTION is primarily for debugging. Maybe
it would help to document that SCHED_IDLE tasks are not preempted by non-idle
tasks when WAKEUP_PREEMPTION is disabled. Otherwise, the intent of having no
preemptions for debugging would be lost.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Madadi Vineeth Reddy

> 
> Best Regards,
>     Abel
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-22 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-21 11:12 [PATCH 0/2] Fix SCHED_IDLE behavior on wakeup preemption Abel Wu
2025-02-21 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Do not let idle entities preempt others Abel Wu
2025-02-21 11:48   ` Vincent Guittot
2025-02-21 19:54   ` Josh Don
2025-02-22 17:12   ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-02-22 17:48   ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-02-23  8:45     ` Abel Wu
2025-02-21 11:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Fix premature check of WAKEUP_PREEMPTION Abel Wu
2025-02-21 11:49   ` Vincent Guittot
2025-02-21 15:57     ` Abel Wu
2025-02-22 18:16       ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy [this message]
2025-02-23  8:44         ` Abel Wu
2025-02-23 10:25           ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-02-23 11:22             ` Abel Wu
2025-02-24 13:47               ` Vincent Guittot
2025-02-24 14:10                 ` Phil Auld
2025-02-25 17:14                   ` Vincent Guittot
2025-02-25  6:29                 ` Abel Wu
2025-02-25 17:15                   ` Vincent Guittot
2025-02-26  7:34                     ` Abel Wu
2025-02-25  6:56                 ` Tianchen Ding
2025-02-24 13:22           ` Vincent Guittot

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=e1cfabab-1326-4cd8-a8a4-4b3fc4c1f7ec@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=6097164a-aa99-4869-b666-9dc7018c1f96@bytedance.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=dtcccc@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=joshdon@google.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=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=wuyun.abel@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