public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bsegall@google.com
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pauld@redhat.com,
	ouwen210@hotmail.com, pkondeti@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/fair: fix unthrottle_cfs_rq for leaf_cfs_rq list
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 11:25:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xm26tv0jk7z9.fsf@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200513135528.4742-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org> (Vincent Guittot's message of "Wed, 13 May 2020 15:55:28 +0200")

Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> writes:

> Although not exactly identical, unthrottle_cfs_rq() and enqueue_task_fair()
> are quite close and follow the same sequence for enqueuing an entity in the
> cfs hierarchy. Modify unthrottle_cfs_rq() to use the same pattern as
> enqueue_task_fair(). This fixes a problem already faced with the latter and
> add an optimization in the last for_each_sched_entity loop.
>
> Reported-by Tao Zhou <zohooouoto@zoho.com.cn>
> Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>

Reveiewed-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>

> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> ---
>
> v3 changes:
>   - remove the unused enqueue variable
>
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 4e12ba882663..9a58874ef104 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4792,7 +4792,6 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>  	struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
>  	struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b = tg_cfs_bandwidth(cfs_rq->tg);
>  	struct sched_entity *se;
> -	int enqueue = 1;
>  	long task_delta, idle_task_delta;
>  
>  	se = cfs_rq->tg->se[cpu_of(rq)];
> @@ -4816,26 +4815,44 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>  	idle_task_delta = cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running;
>  	for_each_sched_entity(se) {
>  		if (se->on_rq)
> -			enqueue = 0;
> +			break;
> +		cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
> +		enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
>  
> +		cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
> +		cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
> +
> +		/* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
> +		if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
> +			goto unthrottle_throttle;
> +	}
> +
> +	for_each_sched_entity(se) {
>  		cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
> -		if (enqueue) {
> -			enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se, ENQUEUE_WAKEUP);
> -		} else {
> -			update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, 0);
> -			se_update_runnable(se);
> -		}
> +
> +		update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, UPDATE_TG);
> +		se_update_runnable(se);
>  
>  		cfs_rq->h_nr_running += task_delta;
>  		cfs_rq->idle_h_nr_running += idle_task_delta;
>  
> +
> +		/* end evaluation on encountering a throttled cfs_rq */
>  		if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
> -			break;
> +			goto unthrottle_throttle;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * One parent has been throttled and cfs_rq removed from the
> +		 * list. Add it back to not break the leaf list.
> +		 */
> +		if (throttled_hierarchy(cfs_rq))
> +			list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!se)
> -		add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
> +	/* At this point se is NULL and we are at root level*/
> +	add_nr_running(rq, task_delta);
>  
> +unthrottle_throttle:
>  	/*
>  	 * The cfs_rq_throttled() breaks in the above iteration can result in
>  	 * incomplete leaf list maintenance, resulting in triggering the
> @@ -4844,7 +4861,8 @@ void unthrottle_cfs_rq(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>  	for_each_sched_entity(se) {
>  		cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
>  
> -		list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> +		if (list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq))
> +			break;
>  	}
>  
>  	assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq(rq);

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-13 18:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-13 13:55 [PATCH v3] sched/fair: fix unthrottle_cfs_rq for leaf_cfs_rq list Vincent Guittot
2020-05-13 18:25 ` bsegall [this message]
2020-05-19 18:44 ` [tip: sched/urgent] sched/fair: Fix unthrottle_cfs_rq() " tip-bot2 for Vincent Guittot
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-11-18 22:56 [PATCH v3] sched/fair: fix unthrottle_cfs_rq " Guilherme G. Piccoli
2020-11-18 23:30 ` Tao Zhou
2020-11-18 23:50 ` Tao Zhou
2020-11-19  0:33   ` Tao Zhou
2020-11-19  8:36     ` Vincent Guittot
2020-11-19 11:34       ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2020-11-19 13:25         ` Vincent Guittot
2020-11-19 14:07           ` Guilherme Piccoli
2021-06-24 10:29           ` Po-Hsu Lin
2021-06-24 12:31             ` 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=xm26tv0jk7z9.fsf@google.com \
    --to=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=ouwen210@hotmail.com \
    --cc=pauld@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    /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