public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
To: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, 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,
	Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix CPU bandwidth limit bypass during CPU hotplug
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:01:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fc570904-a9d0-4c86-b7c8-d47da6bf02dd@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241126064812.809903-2-vishalc@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Vishal,

On 26/11/24 12:18, 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.
> 
> 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                 // intented 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                 // intented behaviour
> sys   0.00 s
> 
> Note: hotplug operation (online, offline) was performed in while(1) loop

Tested with and without this patch for the ebizzy workload as mentioned.

Without the patch:
------------------
19376 records/s
real 20.00 s
user 12.49 s
sys   0.00 s

With the patch:
---------------
17708 records/s
real 20.00 s
user 10.07 s
sys   0.00 s

Hence,
Tested-by: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>

Thanks,
Madadi Vineeth Reddy

> 
> Signed-off-by: Vishal Chourasia <vishalc@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index fbdca89c677f..c436e2307e6f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -6684,7 +6684,8 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq)
>  	list_for_each_entry_rcu(tg, &task_groups, list) {
>  		struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = tg->cfs_rq[cpu_of(rq)];
>  
> -		if (!cfs_rq->runtime_enabled)
> +		/* Don't unthrottle an active cfs_rq unnecessarily */
> +		if (!cfs_rq->runtime_enabled || cpumask_test_cpu(cpu_of(rq), cpu_active_mask))
>  			continue;
>  
>  		/*


  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-27 18:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-26  6:48 [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix CPU bandwidth limit bypass during CPU hotplug Vishal Chourasia
2024-11-27 18:31 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy [this message]
2024-12-06  9:07 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2024-12-07  5:24   ` Vishal Chourasia

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=fc570904-a9d0-4c86-b7c8-d47da6bf02dd@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=20241126064812.809903-2-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=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vishalc@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.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