From: Benjamin Segall <bsegall@google.com>
To: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sched/fair: Block nohz tick_stop when cfs bandwidth in use
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 11:59:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xm26r0q280oy.fsf@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230623130859.GA766130@lorien.usersys.redhat.com> (Phil Auld's message of "Fri, 23 Jun 2023 09:08:59 -0400")
Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 05:37:30PM -0400 Phil Auld wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 01:49:52PM -0700 Benjamin Segall wrote:
>> > Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> writes:
>> >
>> > > CFS bandwidth limits and NOHZ full don't play well together. Tasks
>> > > can easily run well past their quotas before a remote tick does
>> > > accounting. This leads to long, multi-period stalls before such
>> > > tasks can run again. Currentlyi, when presented with these conflicting
>> > > requirements the scheduler is favoring nohz_full and letting the tick
>> > > be stopped. However, nohz tick stopping is already best-effort, there
>> > > are a number of conditions that can prevent it, whereas cfs runtime
>> > > bandwidth is expected to be enforced.
>> > >
>> > > Make the scheduler favor bandwidth over stopping the tick by setting
>> > > TICK_DEP_BIT_SCHED when the only running task is a cfs task with
>> > > runtime limit enabled.
>> > >
>> > > Add sched_feat HZ_BW (off by default) to control this behavior.
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
>> > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
>> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>> > > Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
>> > > Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
>> > > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
>> > > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
>> > > Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
>> > > ---
>> > > kernel/sched/fair.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> > > kernel/sched/features.h | 2 ++
>> > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > > index 373ff5f55884..880eadfac330 100644
>> > > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> > > @@ -6139,6 +6139,33 @@ static void __maybe_unused unthrottle_offline_cfs_rqs(struct rq *rq)
>> > > rcu_read_unlock();
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
>> > > +/* called from pick_next_task_fair() */
>> > > +static void sched_fair_update_stop_tick(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
>> > > +{
>> > > + struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = task_cfs_rq(p);
>> > > + int cpu = cpu_of(rq);
>> > > +
>> > > + if (!sched_feat(HZ_BW) || !cfs_bandwidth_used())
>> > > + return;
>> > > +
>> > > + if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu))
>> > > + return;
>> > > +
>> > > + if (rq->nr_running != 1 || !sched_can_stop_tick(rq))
>> > > + return;
>> > > +
>> > > + /*
>> > > + * We know there is only one task runnable and we've just picked it. The
>> > > + * normal enqueue path will have cleared TICK_DEP_BIT_SCHED if we will
>> > > + * be otherwise able to stop the tick. Just need to check if we are using
>> > > + * bandwidth control.
>> > > + */
>> > > + if (cfs_rq->runtime_enabled)
>> > > + tick_nohz_dep_set_cpu(cpu, TICK_DEP_BIT_SCHED);
>> > > +}
>> > > +#endif
>> >
>> > So from a CFS_BANDWIDTH pov runtime_enabled && nr_running == 1 seems
>> > fine. But working around sched_can_stop_tick instead of with it seems
>> > sketchy in general, and in an edge case like "migrate a task onto the
>> > cpu and then off again" you'd get sched_update_tick_dependency resetting
>> > the TICK_DEP_BIT and then not call PNT (ie a task wakes up onto this cpu
>> > without preempting, and then another cpu goes idle and pulls it, causing
>> > this cpu to go into nohz_full).
>> >
>>
>> The information to make these tests is not available in sched_can_stop_tick.
>> I did start there. When that is called, and we are likely to go nohz_full,
>> curr is null so it's hard to find the right cfs_rq to make that
>> runtime_enabled test against. We could, maybe, plumb the task being enqueued
>> in but it would not be valid for the dequeue path and would be a bit messy.
>>
>
> Sorry, mispoke... rq->curr == rq-idle not null. But still we don't have
> access to the task and its cfs_rq which will have runtime_enabled set.
>
That is unfortunate. I suppose then you'd wind up needing both this
extra bit in PNT to handle the switch into nr_running == 1 territory,
and a "HZ_BW && nr_running == 1 && curr is fair && curr->on_rq &&
curr->cfs_rq->runtime_enabled" check in sched_can_stop_tick to catch
edge cases. (I think that would be sufficient, if an annoyingly long set
of conditionals)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-23 18:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-22 13:27 [PATCH] Sched/fair: Block nohz tick_stop when cfs bandwidth in use Phil Auld
2023-06-22 13:44 ` Phil Auld
2023-06-22 14:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-06-22 15:44 ` Phil Auld
2023-06-22 20:49 ` Benjamin Segall
2023-06-22 21:37 ` Phil Auld
2023-06-23 13:08 ` Phil Auld
2023-06-23 18:59 ` Benjamin Segall [this message]
2023-06-23 19:59 ` Phil Auld
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=xm26r0q280oy.fsf@google.com \
--to=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.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=pauld@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--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