SCHED_DEADLINE server infrastructure
v4 cover SCHED_DEADLINE server infrastructure
This is v4 of Peter's SCHED_DEADLINE server infrastructure implementation [1].
SCHED_DEADLINE servers can help fixing starvation issues of low priority tasks (e.g., SCHED_OTHER) when higher priority tasks monopolize CPU cycles. Today we have RT Throttling; DEADLINE servers should be able to replace and improve that.
In the v1 there was discussion raised about the consequence of using deadline based servers on the fixed-priority workloads. For a demonstration here is the baseline of timerlat scheduling latency as-is, with kernel build background workload:
# rtla timerlat top -u -d 10m
--------------------- %< ------------------------
Timer Latency
0 01:42:24 | IRQ Timer Latency (us) | Thread Timer Latency (us) | Ret user Timer Latency (us) CPU COUNT | cur min avg max | cur min avg max | cur min avg max 0 #6143559 | 0 0 0 92 | 2 1 3 98 | 4 1 5 100 1 #6143559 | 1 0 0 97 | 7 1 5 101 | 9 1 7 103 2 #6143559 | 0 0 0 88 | 3 1 5 95 | 5 1 7 99 3 #6143559 | 0 0 0 90 | 6 1 5 103 | 10 1 7 126 4 #6143558 | 1 0 0 81 | 7 1 4 86 | 9 1 7 90 5 #6143558 | 0 0 0 74 | 3 1 5 79 | 4 1 7 83 6 #6143558 | 0 0 0 83 | 2 1 5 89 | 3 0 7 108 7 #6143558 | 0 0 0 85 | 3 1 4 126 | 5 1 6 137
--------------------- >% ------------------------
And this is the same tests with DL server activating without any delay:
--------------------- %< ------------------------
0 00:10:01 | IRQ Timer Latency (us) | Thread Timer Latency (us) | Ret user Timer Latency (us) CPU COUNT | cur min avg max | cur min avg max | cur min avg max 0 #579147 | 0 0 0 54 | 2 1 52 61095 | 2 2 56 61102 1 #578766 | 0 0 0 83 | 2 1 49 55824 | 3 2 53 55831 2 #578559 | 0 0 1 59 | 2 1 50 55760 | 3 2 54 55770 3 #578318 | 0 0 0 76 | 2 1 49 55751 | 3 2 54 55760 4 #578611 | 0 0 0 64 | 2 1 49 55811 | 3 2 53 55820 5 #578347 | 0 0 1 40 | 2 1 50 56121 | 3 2 55 56133 6 #578938 | 0 0 1 75 | 2 1 49 55755 | 3 2 53 55764 7 #578631 | 0 0 1 36 | 3 1 51 55528 | 4 2 55 55541
--------------------- >% ------------------------
The problem with DL server only implementation is that FIFO tasks might suffer preemption from NORMAL even when spare CPU cycles are available. In fact, fair deadline server is enqueued right away when NORMAL tasks wake up and they are first scheduled by the server, thus potentially preempting a well behaving FIFO task. This is of course not ideal.
We had discussions about it, and one of the possibilities would be using a different scheduling algorithm for this. But IMHO that is an overkill.
Juri and I discussed this and though about delaying the server activation for the 0-lag time, thus enabling the server only if the fair scheduler is about to starve.
The patch 6/7 adds the possibility to defer the server start to the (absolute deadline - runtime) point in time. This is achieved by enqueuing the dl server throttled, with a next replenishing time set to activate the server at (absolute deadline - runtime).
The patch 7/7 add a per_rq interface for the knobs:
fair_server_runtime (950 ms) fair_server_period (1s)
fair_server_defer (enabled)
With defer enabled on CPUs [0:3], the results get better, having a behavior similar to the one we have with the rt throttling.
--------------------- %< ------------------------
0 00:10:01 | IRQ Timer Latency (us) | Thread Timer Latency (us) | Ret user Timer Latency (us) CPU COUNT | cur min avg max | cur min avg max | cur min avg max 0 #600003 | 0 0 0 34 | 6 1 5 75 | 10 2 7 108 1 #600003 | 1 0 1 38 | 9 1 6 96 | 14 2 9 144 2 #600005 | 1 0 1 85 | 10 1 6 94 | 14 2 9 120 3 #600006 | 0 0 1 72 | 8 1 6 103 | 13 2 9 108 4 #600005 | 1 0 1 61 | 10 1 6 110 | 14 2 9 126 5 #578569 | 0 0 0 65 | 13 1 49 55962 | 20 2 54 55974 6 #578852 | 0 0 0 56 | 5 1 48 55559 | 9 2 53 55568 7 #578710 | 0 0 0 91 | 10 1 49 55773 | 16 2 53 55786
--------------------- >% ------------------------
Here are some osnoise measurement, with osnoise threads running as FIFO:1 with different setups (defer enabled):
- CPU 2 isolated
- CPU 3 isolated shared with a CFS busy loop task
- CPU 8 non-isolated
- CPU 9 non-isolated shared with a CFS busy loop task
--------------------- %< ------------------------
~# pgrep ktimer | while read pid; do chrt -p -f 2 $pid; done # for RT kernel ~# sysctl kernel.sched_rt_runtime_us=-1
~# tuna isolate -c 2
~# tuna isolate -c 3
~# taskset -c 3 ./f &
~# taskset -c 9 ./f &
~# osnoise -P f:1 -c 2,3,8,9 -T 1 -d 10m -H 1
Operating System Noise
duration: 0 00:10:00 | time is in us
CPU Period Runtime Noise % CPU Aval Max Noise Max Single HW NMI IRQ Softirq Thread
2 #599 599000000 3 99.99999 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 3 #598 598001768 31188796 94.78449 53907 53907 0 0 2842602 0 2394 8 #599 599000000 918224 99.84670 1735 36 0 88 615903 0 37958 9 #598 598000000 31441197 94.74227 53875 53448 0 88 3417253 0 1364
--------------------- >% ------------------------
the system runs fine!
- no crashes (famous last words)
- FIFO property is kept
- per cpu interface because it is more flexible - and to detach this from the throttling concept.
Global is broken, but it will > /dev/null.
Changes from V3:
- Add the defer server (Daniel)
- Add an per rq interface (Daniel with peter's feedback)
- Add an option not defer the server (for Joel)
- Typos and 1-liner fixes (Valentin, Luca, Peter)
- Fair scheduler running on dl server do not account as RT task (Daniel)
- Changed the condition to enable the server (RT & fair tasks) (Daniel)
Changes from v2:
- Refactor/rephrase/typos changes
- Defferable server using throttling
- The server starts when RT && Fair tasks are enqueued
- Interface with runtime/period/defer option
Changes from v1:
- rebased on 6.4-rc1 tip/sched/core
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira (2):
sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
sched/fair: Fair server interface
Peter Zijlstra (5):
sched: Unify runtime accounting across classes sched/deadline: Collect sched_dl_entity initialization sched/deadline: Move bandwidth accounting into {en,de}queue_dl_entity sched/deadline: Introduce deadline servers
sched/fair: Add trivial fair server
include/linux/sched.h | 31 ++- kernel/sched/core.c | 23 +- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 555 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- kernel/sched/debug.c | 177 +++++++++++++ kernel/sched/fair.c | 92 ++++++- kernel/sched/rt.c | 21 +- kernel/sched/sched.h | 64 ++++- kernel/sched/stop_task.c | 13 +- 8 files changed, 737 insertions(+), 239 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
PATCH v4 1/7 sched: Unify runtime accounting across classes
From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
All classes use sched_entity::exec_start to track runtime and have copies of the exact same code around to compute runtime.
Collapse all that.
--- include/linux/sched.h | 2 +- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 15 +++-------- kernel/sched/fair.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- kernel/sched/rt.c | 15 +++-------- kernel/sched/sched.h | 12 ++------- kernel/sched/stop_task.c | 13 +-------- 6 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
include/linux/sched.h +1 -1
@@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ struct sched_statistics {u64 block_max;s64 sum_block_runtime; -u64 exec_max; +s64 exec_max;u64 slice_max;u64 nr_migrations_cold;
kernel/sched/deadline.c +3 -12
@@ -1299,9 +1299,8 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq) {struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &curr->dl; -u64 delta_exec, scaled_delta_exec; +s64 delta_exec, scaled_delta_exec;int cpu =cpu_of (rq); -u64 now;if (!dl_task (curr) || !on_dl_rq (dl_se))return ;
@@ -1314,21 +1313,13 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq)* natural solution, but the full ramifications of this * approach need further study. */ - now =rq_clock_task (rq); - delta_exec = now - curr->se.exec_start; -if (unlikely ((s64 )delta_exec <=0 )) { + delta_exec =update_curr_common (rq); +if (unlikely (delta_exec <=0 )) {if (unlikely (dl_se->dl_yielded)) goto throttle;return ; } -schedstat_set (curr->stats.exec_max, -max (curr->stats.exec_max, delta_exec)); - -trace_sched_stat_runtime (curr, delta_exec,0 ); - -update_current_exec_runtime (curr, now, delta_exec); -if (dl_entity_is_special (dl_se))return ;
kernel/sched/fair.c +43 -14
74 lines not on this page · raw message
kernel/sched/rt.c +3 -12
@@ -1046,24 +1046,15 @@ static void update_curr_rt(struct rq *rq) {struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;struct sched_rt_entity *rt_se = &curr->rt; -u64 delta_exec; -u64 now; +s64 delta_exec;if (curr->sched_class != &rt_sched_class)return ; - now =rq_clock_task (rq); - delta_exec = now - curr->se.exec_start; -if (unlikely ((s64 )delta_exec <=0 )) + delta_exec =update_curr_common (rq); +if (unlikely (delta_exec <=0 ))return ; -schedstat_set (curr->stats.exec_max, -max (curr->stats.exec_max, delta_exec)); - -trace_sched_stat_runtime (curr, delta_exec,0 ); - -update_current_exec_runtime (curr, now, delta_exec); -if (!rt_bandwidth_enabled ())return ;
kernel/sched/sched.h +2 -10
@@ -2228,6 +2228,8 @@ struct affinity_context {unsigned int flags; }; +extern s64 update_curr_common (struct rq *rq); +struct sched_class {#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK
@@ -3280,16 +3282,6 @@ extern int sched_dynamic_mode(const char *str);extern void sched_dynamic_update (int mode);#endif -static inline void update_current_exec_runtime (struct task_struct *curr, -u64 now,u64 delta_exec) -{ - curr->se.sum_exec_runtime += delta_exec; -account_group_exec_runtime (curr, delta_exec); - - curr->se.exec_start = now; -cgroup_account_cputime (curr, delta_exec); -} -#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_MM_CID #define SCHED_MM_CID_PERIOD_NS (100ULL * 1000000)/* 100ms */
kernel/sched/stop_task.c +1 -12
@@ -70,18 +70,7 @@ static void yield_task_stop(struct rq *rq)static void put_prev_task_stop (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *prev) { -struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr; -u64 now, delta_exec; - - now =rq_clock_task (rq); - delta_exec = now - curr->se.exec_start; -if (unlikely ((s64 )delta_exec <0 )) - delta_exec =0 ; - -schedstat_set (curr->stats.exec_max, -max (curr->stats.exec_max, delta_exec)); - -update_current_exec_runtime (curr, now, delta_exec); +update_curr_common (rq); }/*
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] sched: Unify runtime accounting across classes
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 22:28:52 +0200
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]> wrote:
As I have a vested interest in this work, I started a deep dive into the code.
Quoted 14 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +1
-2@@ -1299,9 +1299,8 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq) {struct task_struct *curr = rq->curr;struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &curr->dl; -u64 delta_exec, scaled_delta_exec; +s64 delta_exec, scaled_delta_exec;int cpu =cpu_of (rq); -u64 now;if (!dl_task (curr) || !on_dl_rq (dl_se))return ;
kernel/sched/deadline.c static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq) · line 1316
Quoted 7 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +1
-3@@ -1314,21 +1313,13 @@ static void update_curr_dl(struct rq *rq)* natural solution, but the full ramifications of this * approach need further study. */ - now =rq_clock_task (rq); - delta_exec = now - curr->se.exec_start; -if (unlikely ((s64 )delta_exec <=0 )) { + delta_exec =update_curr_common (rq);
I have to say, mapping the update_curr_common() to the removed code below, wasn't as easy as I thought it would be, as the above function is broken up slightly differently.
But the conclusion does appear to be pretty much the same.
-- Steve
Quoted 16 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +1
-7+if (unlikely (delta_exec <=0 )) {if (unlikely (dl_se->dl_yielded)) goto throttle;return ; } -schedstat_set (curr->stats.exec_max, -max (curr->stats.exec_max, delta_exec)); - -trace_sched_stat_runtime (curr, delta_exec,0 ); - -update_current_exec_runtime (curr, now, delta_exec); -if (dl_entity_is_special (dl_se))return ;
PATCH v4 2/7 sched/deadline: Collect sched_dl_entity initialization
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraFrom: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Create a single function that initializes a sched_dl_entity.
--- kernel/sched/core.c | 5 +---- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 22 +++++++++++++++------- kernel/sched/sched.h | 5 +---- 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
kernel/sched/core.c +1 -4
@@ -4513,10 +4513,7 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)memset (&p->stats,0 ,sizeof (p->stats));#endif -RB_CLEAR_NODE (&p->dl.rb_node); -init_dl_task_timer (&p->dl); -init_dl_inactive_task_timer (&p->dl); -__dl_clear_params (p); +init_dl_entity (&p->dl);INIT_LIST_HEAD (&p->rt.run_list); p->rt.timeout =0 ;
kernel/sched/deadline.c +15 -7
@@ -335,6 +335,8 @@ static void dl_change_utilization(struct task_struct *p, u64 new_bw)__add_rq_bw (new_bw, &rq->dl); } +static void __dl_clear_params (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); +/* * The utilization of a task cannot be immediately removed from * the rq active utilization (running_bw) when the task blocks.
@@ -434,7 +436,7 @@ static void task_non_contending(struct task_struct *p)raw_spin_lock (&dl_b->lock);__dl_sub (dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw,dl_bw_cpus (task_cpu (p)));raw_spin_unlock (&dl_b->lock); -__dl_clear_params (p); +__dl_clear_params (dl_se); }return ;
@@ -1207,7 +1209,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart dl_task_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)return HRTIMER_NORESTART ; } -void init_dl_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +static void init_dl_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) {struct hrtimer *timer = &dl_se->dl_timer;
@@ -1413,7 +1415,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart inactive_task_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)raw_spin_lock (&dl_b->lock);__dl_sub (dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw,dl_bw_cpus (task_cpu (p)));raw_spin_unlock (&dl_b->lock); -__dl_clear_params (p); +__dl_clear_params (dl_se); goto unlock; }
@@ -1429,7 +1431,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart inactive_task_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)return HRTIMER_NORESTART ; } -void init_dl_inactive_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +static void init_dl_inactive_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) {struct hrtimer *timer = &dl_se->inactive_timer;
@@ -2984,10 +2986,8 @@ bool __checkparam_dl(const struct sched_attr *attr)/* * This function clears the sched_dl_entity static params. */ -void __dl_clear_params (struct task_struct *p) +static void __dl_clear_params (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) { -struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &p->dl; - dl_se->dl_runtime =0 ; dl_se->dl_deadline =0 ; dl_se->dl_period =0 ;
@@ -3005,6 +3005,14 @@ void __dl_clear_params(struct task_struct *p)#endif } +void init_dl_entity (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +{ +RB_CLEAR_NODE (&dl_se->rb_node); +init_dl_task_timer (dl_se); +init_dl_inactive_task_timer (dl_se); +__dl_clear_params (dl_se); +} +bool dl_param_changed (struct task_struct *p,const struct sched_attr *attr) {struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &p->dl;
kernel/sched/sched.h +1 -4
@@ -284,8 +284,6 @@ struct rt_bandwidth {unsigned int rt_period_active; }; -void __dl_clear_params (struct task_struct *p); -static inline int dl_bandwidth_enabled (void ) {return sysctl_sched_rt_runtime >=0 ;
@@ -2443,8 +2441,7 @@ extern struct rt_bandwidth def_rt_bandwidth;extern void init_rt_bandwidth (struct rt_bandwidth *rt_b,u64 period,u64 runtime);extern bool sched_rt_bandwidth_account (struct rt_rq *rt_rq); -extern void init_dl_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); -extern void init_dl_inactive_task_timer (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); +extern void init_dl_entity (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se);#define BW_SHIFT 20#define BW_UNIT (1 << BW_SHIFT)
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
PATCH v4 3/7 sched/deadline: Move bandwidth accounting into {en,de}queue_dl_entity
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraFrom: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
In preparation of introducing !task sched_dl_entity; move the bandwidth accounting into {en.de}queue_dl_entity().
--- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ kernel/sched/sched.h | 6 ++ 2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
kernel/sched/deadline.c +72 -58
@@ -391,12 +391,12 @@ static void __dl_clear_params(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se);* up, and checks if the task is still in the "ACTIVE non contending" * state or not (in the second case, it updates running_bw). */ -static void task_non_contending (struct task_struct *p) +static void task_non_contending (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) { -struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &p->dl;struct hrtimer *timer = &dl_se->inactive_timer;struct dl_rq *dl_rq =dl_rq_of_se (dl_se);struct rq *rq =rq_of_dl_rq (dl_rq); +struct task_struct *p =dl_task_of (dl_se);s64 zerolag_time;/*
@@ -428,13 +428,14 @@ static void task_non_contending(struct task_struct *p)if ((zerolag_time <0 ) ||hrtimer_active (&dl_se->inactive_timer)) {if (dl_task (p))sub_running_bw (dl_se, dl_rq); +if (!dl_task (p) ||READ_ONCE (p->__state) ==TASK_DEAD ) {struct dl_bw *dl_b =dl_bw_of (task_cpu (p));if (READ_ONCE (p->__state) ==TASK_DEAD ) -sub_rq_bw (&p->dl, &rq->dl); +sub_rq_bw (dl_se, &rq->dl);raw_spin_lock (&dl_b->lock); -__dl_sub (dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw,dl_bw_cpus (task_cpu (p))); +__dl_sub (dl_b, dl_se->dl_bw,dl_bw_cpus (task_cpu (p)));raw_spin_unlock (&dl_b->lock);__dl_clear_params (dl_se); }
@@ -1627,6 +1628,41 @@ enqueue_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, int flags)update_stats_enqueue_dl (dl_rq_of_se (dl_se), dl_se, flags); +/* +* Check if a constrained deadline task was activated +* after the deadline but before the next period. +* If that is the case, the task will be throttled and +* the replenishment timer will be set to the next period. +*/ +if (!dl_se->dl_throttled && !dl_is_implicit (dl_se)) +dl_check_constrained_dl (dl_se); + +if (flags & (ENQUEUE_RESTORE |ENQUEUE_MIGRATING )) { +struct dl_rq *dl_rq =dl_rq_of_se (dl_se); + +add_rq_bw (dl_se, dl_rq); +add_running_bw (dl_se, dl_rq); + } + +/* +* If p is throttled, we do not enqueue it. In fact, if it exhausted +* its budget it needs a replenishment and, since it now is on +* its rq, the bandwidth timer callback (which clearly has not +* run yet) will take care of this. +* However, the active utilization does not depend on the fact +* that the task is on the runqueue or not (but depends on the +* task's state - in GRUB parlance, "inactive" vs "active contending"). +* In other words, even if a task is throttled its utilization must +* be counted in the active utilization; hence, we need to call +* add_running_bw(). +*/ +if (dl_se->dl_throttled && !(flags &ENQUEUE_REPLENISH )) { +if (flags &ENQUEUE_WAKEUP ) +task_contending (dl_se, flags); + +return ; + } +/* * If this is a wakeup or a new instance, the scheduling * parameters of the task might need updating. Otherwise,
@@ -1646,9 +1682,28 @@ enqueue_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, int flags)__enqueue_dl_entity (dl_se); } -static void dequeue_dl_entity (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +static void dequeue_dl_entity (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int flags) {__dequeue_dl_entity (dl_se); + +if (flags & (DEQUEUE_SAVE |DEQUEUE_MIGRATING )) { +struct dl_rq *dl_rq =dl_rq_of_se (dl_se); + +sub_running_bw (dl_se, dl_rq); +sub_rq_bw (dl_se, dl_rq); + } + +/* +* This check allows to start the inactive timer (or to immediately +* decrease the active utilization, if needed) in two cases: +* when the task blocks and when it is terminating +* (p->state == TASK_DEAD). We can handle the two cases in the same +* way, because from GRUB's point of view the same thing is happening +* (the task moves from "active contending" to "active non contending" +* or "inactive") +*/ +if (flags &DEQUEUE_SLEEP ) +task_non_contending (dl_se); }static void enqueue_task_dl (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags)
@@ -1693,76 +1748,35 @@ static void enqueue_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)return ; } -/* -* Check if a constrained deadline task was activated -* after the deadline but before the next period. -* If that is the case, the task will be throttled and -* the replenishment timer will be set to the next period. -*/ -if (!p->dl.dl_throttled && !dl_is_implicit (&p->dl)) -dl_check_constrained_dl (&p->dl); - -if (p->on_rq ==TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING || flags &ENQUEUE_RESTORE ) { -add_rq_bw (&p->dl, &rq->dl); -add_running_bw (&p->dl, &rq->dl); - } - -/* -* If p is throttled, we do not enqueue it. In fact, if it exhausted -* its budget it needs a replenishment and, since it now is on -* its rq, the bandwidth timer callback (which clearly has not -* run yet) will take care of this. -* However, the active utilization does not depend on the fact -* that the task is on the runqueue or not (but depends on the -* task's state - in GRUB parlance, "inactive" vs "active contending"). -* In other words, even if a task is throttled its utilization must -* be counted in the active utilization; hence, we need to call -* add_running_bw(). -*/ -if (p->dl.dl_throttled && !(flags &ENQUEUE_REPLENISH )) { -if (flags &ENQUEUE_WAKEUP ) -task_contending (&p->dl, flags); - -return ; - } -check_schedstat_required ();update_stats_wait_start_dl (dl_rq_of_se (&p->dl), &p->dl); +if (p->on_rq ==TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING ) + flags |=ENQUEUE_MIGRATING ; +enqueue_dl_entity (&p->dl, flags); -if (!task_current (rq, p) && p->nr_cpus_allowed >1 ) +if (!task_current (rq, p) && !p->dl.dl_throttled && p->nr_cpus_allowed >1 )enqueue_pushable_dl_task (rq, p); }static void __dequeue_task_dl (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags) {update_stats_dequeue_dl (&rq->dl, &p->dl, flags); -dequeue_dl_entity (&p->dl); -dequeue_pushable_dl_task (rq, p); +dequeue_dl_entity (&p->dl, flags); + +if (!p->dl.dl_throttled) +dequeue_pushable_dl_task (rq, p); }static void dequeue_task_dl (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags) {update_curr_dl (rq); -__dequeue_task_dl (rq, p, flags); -if (p->on_rq ==TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING || flags &DEQUEUE_SAVE ) { -sub_running_bw (&p->dl, &rq->dl); -sub_rq_bw (&p->dl, &rq->dl); - } +if (p->on_rq ==TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING ) + flags |=DEQUEUE_MIGRATING ; -/* -* This check allows to start the inactive timer (or to immediately -* decrease the active utilization, if needed) in two cases: -* when the task blocks and when it is terminating -* (p->state == TASK_DEAD). We can handle the two cases in the same -* way, because from GRUB's point of view the same thing is happening -* (the task moves from "active contending" to "active non contending" -* or "inactive") -*/ -if (flags &DEQUEUE_SLEEP ) -task_non_contending (p); +__dequeue_task_dl (rq, p, flags); }/*
@@ -2578,7 +2592,7 @@ static void switched_from_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)* will reset the task parameters. */ if (task_on_rq_queued (p) && p->dl.dl_runtime) -task_non_contending (p); +task_non_contending (&p->dl);/* * In case a task is setscheduled out from SCHED_DEADLINE we need to
kernel/sched/sched.h +6 -0
@@ -2193,6 +2193,10 @@ extern const u32 sched_prio_to_wmult[40];* MOVE - paired with SAVE/RESTORE, explicitly does not preserve the location * in the runqueue. * +* NOCLOCK - skip the update_rq_clock() (avoids double updates) +* +* MIGRATION - p->on_rq == TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING (used for DEADLINE) +* * ENQUEUE_HEAD - place at front of runqueue (tail if not specified) * ENQUEUE_REPLENISH - CBS (replenish runtime and postpone deadline) * ENQUEUE_MIGRATED - the task was migrated during wakeup
@@ -2203,6 +2207,7 @@ extern const u32 sched_prio_to_wmult[40];#define DEQUEUE_SAVE 0x02/* Matches ENQUEUE_RESTORE */ #define DEQUEUE_MOVE 0x04/* Matches ENQUEUE_MOVE */ #define DEQUEUE_NOCLOCK 0x08/* Matches ENQUEUE_NOCLOCK */ +#define DEQUEUE_MIGRATING 0x100/* Matches ENQUEUE_MIGRATING */ #define ENQUEUE_WAKEUP 0x01#define ENQUEUE_RESTORE 0x02
@@ -2217,6 +2222,7 @@ extern const u32 sched_prio_to_wmult[40];#define ENQUEUE_MIGRATED 0x00#endif #define ENQUEUE_INITIAL 0x80 +#define ENQUEUE_MIGRATING 0x100#define RETRY_TASK ((void *)-1UL)
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
PATCH v4 4/7 sched/deadline: Introduce deadline servers
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraFrom: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Low priority tasks (e.g., SCHED_OTHER) can suffer starvation if tasks with higher priority (e.g., SCHED_FIFO) monopolize CPU(s).
RT Throttling has been introduced a while ago as a (mostly debug) countermeasure one can utilize to reserve some CPU time for low priority tasks (usually background type of work, e.g. workqueues, timers, etc.). It however has its own problems (see documentation) and the undesired effect of unconditionally throttling FIFO tasks even when no lower priority activity needs to run (there are mechanisms to fix this issue as well, but, again, with their own problems).
Introduce deadline servers to service low priority tasks needs under starvation conditions. Deadline servers are built extending SCHED_DEADLINE implementation to allow 2-level scheduling (a sched_deadline entity becomes a container for lower priority scheduling entities).
--- include/linux/sched.h | 22 ++- kernel/sched/core.c | 17 ++ kernel/sched/deadline.c | 344 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- kernel/sched/fair.c | 4 + kernel/sched/sched.h | 27 ++++ 5 files changed, 301 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)
include/linux/sched.h +21 -1
@@ -63,12 +63,14 @@ struct robust_list_head;struct root_domain ;struct rq ;struct sched_attr ; +struct sched_dl_entity ;struct sched_param ;struct seq_file ;struct sighand_struct ;struct signal_struct ;struct task_delay_info ;struct task_group ; +struct task_struct ;struct user_event_mm ;/*
@@ -604,6 +606,9 @@ struct sched_rt_entity {#endif } __randomize_layout; +typedef bool (*dl_server_has_tasks_f )(struct sched_dl_entity *); +typedef struct task_struct *(*dl_server_pick_f )(struct sched_dl_entity *); +struct sched_dl_entity {struct rb_node rb_node;
@@ -651,6 +656,7 @@ struct sched_dl_entity { unsigned int dl_yielded : 1; unsigned int dl_non_contending : 1; unsigned int dl_overrun : 1; + unsigned int dl_server : 1;/* * Bandwidth enforcement timer. Each -deadline task has its
@@ -665,7 +671,20 @@ struct sched_dl_entity {* timer is needed to decrease the active utilization at the correct * time. */ -struct hrtimer inactive_timer; +struct hrtimer inactive_timer; + +/* +* Bits for DL-server functionality. Also see the comment near +* dl_server_update(). +* +* @rq the runqueue this server is for +* +* @server_has_tasks() returns true if @server_pick return a +* runnable task. +*/ +struct rq *rq; +dl_server_has_tasks_f server_has_tasks; +dl_server_pick_f server_pick;#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES /*
@@ -794,6 +813,7 @@ struct task_struct {struct sched_entity se;struct sched_rt_entity rt;struct sched_dl_entity dl; +struct sched_dl_entity *server;const struct sched_class *sched_class;#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_CORE
kernel/sched/core.c +17 -0
@@ -3815,6 +3815,8 @@ ttwu_do_activate(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int wake_flags, rq->idle_stamp = 0; }#endif + + p->server =NULL ; }/*
@@ -6008,12 +6010,27 @@ __pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf) p =pick_next_task_idle (rq); } +/* +* This is the fast path; it cannot be a DL server pick; +* therefore even if @p == @prev, ->server must be NULL. +*/ +if (p->server) + p->server =NULL ; +return p; } restart:put_prev_task_balance (rq, prev, rf); +/* +* We've updated @prev and no longer need the server link, clear it. +* Must be done before ->pick_next_task() because that can (re)set +* ->server. +*/ +if (prev->server) + prev->server =NULL ; +for_each_class (class) { p = class->pick_next_task (rq);if (p)
kernel/sched/deadline.c +232 -112
608 lines not on this page · raw message
kernel/sched/fair.c +4 -0
@@ -1131,6 +1131,8 @@ s64 update_curr_common(struct rq *rq)account_group_exec_runtime (curr, delta_exec);cgroup_account_cputime (curr, delta_exec); +if (curr->server) +dl_server_update (curr->server, delta_exec);return delta_exec; }
@@ -1160,6 +1162,8 @@ static void update_curr(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)trace_sched_stat_runtime (curtask, delta_exec, curr->vruntime);cgroup_account_cputime (curtask, delta_exec);account_group_exec_runtime (curtask, delta_exec); +if (curtask->server) +dl_server_update (curtask->server, delta_exec); }account_cfs_rq_runtime (cfs_rq, delta_exec);
kernel/sched/sched.h +27 -0
@@ -324,6 +324,33 @@ extern bool dl_param_changed(struct task_struct *p, const struct sched_attr *attextern int dl_cpuset_cpumask_can_shrink (const struct cpumask *cur,const struct cpumask *trial);extern int dl_bw_check_overflow (int cpu); +/* +* SCHED_DEADLINE supports servers (nested scheduling) with the following +* interface: +* +* dl_se::rq -- runqueue we belong to. +* +* dl_se::server_has_tasks() -- used on bandwidth enforcement; we 'stop' the +* server when it runs out of tasks to run. +* +* dl_se::server_pick() -- nested pick_next_task(); we yield the period if this +* returns NULL. +* +* dl_server_update() -- called from update_curr_common(), propagates runtime +* to the server. +* +* dl_server_start() +* dl_server_stop() -- start/stop the server when it has (no) tasks. +* +* dl_server_init() -- initializes the server. +*/ +extern void dl_server_update (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,s64 delta_exec); +extern void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); +extern void dl_server_stop (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); +extern void dl_server_init (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,struct rq *rq, +dl_server_has_tasks_f has_tasks, +dl_server_pick_f pick); +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED struct cfs_rq ;
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
PATCH v4 5/7 sched/fair: Add trivial fair server
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraFrom: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Use deadline servers to service fair tasks.
This patch adds a fair_server deadline entity which acts as a container for fair entities and can be used to fix starvation when higher priority (wrt fair) tasks are monopolizing CPU(s).
[ dl_server do not account for rt ]
--- kernel/sched/core.c | 1 + kernel/sched/deadline.c | 7 +++++++ kernel/sched/fair.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ kernel/sched/sched.h | 4 ++++ 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
kernel/sched/core.c +1 -0
@@ -10055,6 +10055,7 @@ void __init sched_init(void)#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ hrtick_rq_init (rq);atomic_set (&rq->nr_iowait,0 ); +fair_server_init (rq);#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_CORE rq->core = rq;
kernel/sched/deadline.c +7 -0
@@ -1403,6 +1403,13 @@ static void update_curr_dl_se(struct rq *rq, struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64resched_curr (rq); } +/* +* The fair server (sole dl_server) does not account for real-time +* workload because it is running fair work. +*/ +if (dl_server (dl_se)) +return ; +/* * Because -- for now -- we share the rt bandwidth, we need to * account our runtime there too, otherwise actual rt tasks
kernel/sched/fair.c +29 -0
@@ -6499,6 +6499,9 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)*/ util_est_enqueue (&rq->cfs, p); +if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) +dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server); +/* * If in_iowait is set, the code below may not trigger any cpufreq * utilization updates, so do it here explicitly with the IOWAIT flag
@@ -6643,6 +6646,9 @@ static void dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) rq->next_balance = jiffies; dequeue_throttle: +if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) +dl_server_stop (&rq->fair_server); +util_est_update (&rq->cfs, p, task_sleep);hrtick_update (rq); }
@@ -8291,6 +8297,29 @@ static struct task_struct *__pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq)return pick_next_task_fair (rq,NULL ,NULL ); } +static bool fair_server_has_tasks (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +{ +return !!dl_se->rq->cfs.nr_running; +} + +static struct task_struct *fair_server_pick (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se) +{ +return pick_next_task_fair (dl_se->rq,NULL ,NULL ); +} + +void fair_server_init (struct rq *rq) +{ +struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se = &rq->fair_server; + +init_dl_entity (dl_se); + + dl_se->dl_runtime =50 *NSEC_PER_MSEC ; + dl_se->dl_deadline =1000 *NSEC_PER_MSEC ; + dl_se->dl_period =1000 *NSEC_PER_MSEC ; + +dl_server_init (dl_se, rq, fair_server_has_tasks, fair_server_pick); +} +/* * Account for a descheduled task: */
kernel/sched/sched.h +4 -0
@@ -351,6 +351,8 @@ extern void dl_server_init(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, struct rq *rq,dl_server_has_tasks_f has_tasks, dl_server_pick_f pick); +extern void fair_server_init (struct rq *); +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED struct cfs_rq ;
@@ -1024,6 +1026,8 @@ struct rq {struct rt_rq rt;struct dl_rq dl; +struct sched_dl_entity fair_server; +#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED /* list of leaf cfs_rq on this CPU: */ struct list_head leaf_cfs_rq_list;
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
PATCH v4 6/7 sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraAmong the motivations for the DL servers is the real-time throttling mechanism. This mechanism works by throttling the rt_rq after running for a long period without leaving space for fair tasks.
The base dl server avoids this problem by boosting fair tasks instead of throttling the rt_rq. The point is that it boosts without waiting for potential starvation, causing some non-intuitive cases.
For example, an IRQ dispatches two tasks on an idle system, a fair and an RT. The DL server will be activated, running the fair task before the RT one. This problem can be avoided by deferring the dl server activation.
By passing the deferring option, the dl_server will dispatch an SCHED_DEADLINE reservation throttled, and the replenishment timer set for (period - runtime) ns from start time. Thus, boosting the fair rq on its 0-laxity time with respect to rt_rq.
The fair server will be scheduled under EDF, with a new a period at the replenishment time, thus not breaking dl tasks.
--- include/linux/sched.h | 7 +++++ kernel/sched/deadline.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- kernel/sched/fair.c | 10 ++++--- kernel/sched/rt.c | 6 ++++ kernel/sched/sched.h | 12 +++++++- 5 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
include/linux/sched.h +7 -0
@@ -609,6 +609,12 @@ struct sched_rt_entity {typedef bool (*dl_server_has_tasks_f )(struct sched_dl_entity *);typedef struct task_struct *(*dl_server_pick_f )(struct sched_dl_entity *); +enum dl_server_state { +DL_SERVER_STOPPED =0 , +DL_SERVER_DEFER , +DL_SERVER_RUNNING +}; +struct sched_dl_entity {struct rb_node rb_node;
@@ -685,6 +691,7 @@ struct sched_dl_entity {struct rq *rq;dl_server_has_tasks_f server_has_tasks;dl_server_pick_f server_pick; +enum dl_server_state server_state;#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES /*
kernel/sched/deadline.c +57 -4
118 lines not on this page · raw message
kernel/sched/fair.c +6 -4
@@ -6499,9 +6499,6 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)*/ util_est_enqueue (&rq->cfs, p); -if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) -dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server); -/* * If in_iowait is set, the code below may not trigger any cpufreq * utilization updates, so do it here explicitly with the IOWAIT flag
@@ -6568,6 +6565,9 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)update_overutilized_status (rq); enqueue_throttle: +if (sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server, rq->fair_server_defer); +assert_list_leaf_cfs_rq (rq);hrtick_update (rq);
@@ -6646,7 +6646,7 @@ static void dequeue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) rq->next_balance = jiffies; dequeue_throttle: -if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) +if (!sched_fair_server_needed (rq))dl_server_stop (&rq->fair_server);util_est_update (&rq->cfs, p, task_sleep);
@@ -8317,6 +8317,8 @@ void fair_server_init(struct rq *rq) dl_se->dl_deadline =1000 *NSEC_PER_MSEC ; dl_se->dl_period =1000 *NSEC_PER_MSEC ; + rq->fair_server_defer =1 ; +dl_server_init (dl_se, rq, fair_server_has_tasks, fair_server_pick); }
kernel/sched/rt.c +6 -0
@@ -1537,6 +1537,9 @@ enqueue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)if (!task_current (rq, p) && p->nr_cpus_allowed >1 )enqueue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server, rq->fair_server_defer); }static void dequeue_task_rt (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags)
@@ -1547,6 +1550,9 @@ static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)dequeue_rt_entity (rt_se, flags);dequeue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (!sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_stop (&rq->fair_server); }/*
kernel/sched/sched.h +11 -1
@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ extern int dl_bw_check_overflow(int cpu);* dl_server_init() -- initializes the server. */ extern void dl_server_update (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,s64 delta_exec); -extern void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); +extern void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int defer);extern void dl_server_stop (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se); extern void dl_server_init(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, struct rq *rq, dl_server_has_tasks_f has_tasks,
@@ -1027,6 +1027,7 @@ struct rq {struct dl_rq dl;struct sched_dl_entity fair_server; +int fair_server_defer;#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED /* list of leaf cfs_rq on this CPU: */
@@ -2394,6 +2395,15 @@ static inline bool sched_fair_runnable(struct rq *rq)return rq->cfs.nr_running >0 ; } +static inline bool sched_fair_server_needed (struct rq *rq) +{ +/* +* The fair server will activate anytime a fair task can starve +* because real-time tasks. +*/ +return (sched_rt_runnable (rq) &&sched_fair_runnable (rq)); +} +extern struct task_struct *pick_next_task_fair (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *prev,struct rq_flags *rf);extern struct task_struct *pick_next_task_idle (struct rq *rq);
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 20 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/deadline.c +19
-0+void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int defer) { +if (dl_se->server_state !=DL_SERVER_STOPPED ) { +WARN_ON_ONCE (!(on_dl_rq (dl_se) || dl_se->dl_throttled)); +return ; + } + +if (defer) { +/* +* Postpone the replenishment to the (next period - the execution time) +* +* With this in place, we have two cases: +* +* On the absence of DL tasks: +* The server will start at the replenishment time, getting +* its runtime before now + period. This is the expected +* throttling behavior. +* +* In the presense of DL tasks: +* The server will be replenished, and then it will be
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1477
Quoted 10 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +10
-0+* schedule according to EDF, not breaking SCHED_DEADLINE. +* +* In the first cycle the server will be postponed at most +* at period + period - runtime at most. But then the +* server will receive its runtime/period. +* +* The server will, however, run on top of any RT task, which +* is the expected throttling behavior. +*/ + dl_se->deadline =rq_clock (dl_se->rq) + dl_se->dl_period - dl_se->dl_runtime;
I was confused by this, but this is an instance of replenish_dl_new_period(), where we explicitly do not preserve the period.
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1481
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+/* Zero the runtime */ + dl_se->runtime =0 ; +/* throttle the server */ + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ;
These comments are both obvious and placed so as to make everything unreadable :/
Quoted 45 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +8
-0+ + dl_se->server_state =DL_SERVER_DEFER ; +start_dl_timer (dl_se); +return ; + } +if (!dl_server (dl_se)) { dl_se->dl_server =1 ;setup_new_dl_entity (dl_se); } + + dl_se->server_state =DL_SERVER_RUNNING ;enqueue_dl_entity (dl_se,ENQUEUE_WAKEUP ); }kernel/sched/fair.c +0
-3@@ -6499,9 +6499,6 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)*/ util_est_enqueue (&rq->cfs, p); -if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) -dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server); -/* * If in_iowait is set, the code below may not trigger any cpufreq * utilization updates, so do it here explicitly with the IOWAIT flag kernel/sched/rt.c +3
-0@@ -1537,6 +1537,9 @@ enqueue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)if (!task_current (rq, p) && p->nr_cpus_allowed >1 )enqueue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server, rq->fair_server_defer); }static void dequeue_task_rt (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags)
kernel/sched/rt.c static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) · line 1558
Quoted 9 lines
kernel/sched/rt.c +3
-0@@ -1547,6 +1550,9 @@ static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)dequeue_rt_entity (rt_se, flags);dequeue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (!sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_stop (&rq->fair_server); }/*
I'm thinking this is wrong -- ISTR there definite benefits to explicit slack time scheduling, meaning the server should also run while DL tasks are on. Additionally, running the server when there are only fair tasks is mostly harmless, right? So why this change?
One of the benefits was -- IIRC, that we no longer need to subtract some random margin from the reservation limit, but there were more I think.
Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 27 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 26 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/deadline.c +25
-0+void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int defer) { +if (dl_se->server_state !=DL_SERVER_STOPPED ) { +WARN_ON_ONCE (!(on_dl_rq (dl_se) || dl_se->dl_throttled)); +return ; + } + +if (defer) { +/* +* Postpone the replenishment to the (next period - the execution time) +* +* With this in place, we have two cases: +* +* On the absence of DL tasks: +* The server will start at the replenishment time, getting +* its runtime before now + period. This is the expected +* throttling behavior. +* +* In the presense of DL tasks: +* The server will be replenished, and then it will be +* schedule according to EDF, not breaking SCHED_DEADLINE. +* +* In the first cycle the server will be postponed at most +* at period + period - runtime at most. But then the +* server will receive its runtime/period. +*
Quoted 8 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1477
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+* The server will, however, run on top of any RT task, which +* is the expected throttling behavior. +*/ + dl_se->deadline =rq_clock (dl_se->rq) + dl_se->dl_period - dl_se->dl_runtime;I was confused by this, but this is an instance of
replenish_dl_new_period(), where we explicitly do not preserve the period.
yeah, it is two operations in one (so not straight forward). It sets the period as the now - runtime, so..
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1481
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+/* Zero the runtime */ + dl_se->runtime =0 ; +/* throttle the server */ + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ;
as the server is throttled, it will set the replenishing timer for now - runtime + period because of the deadline.
Quoted 2 lines
These comments are both obvious and placed so as to make everything unreadable :/
I can't disagree :-) I will remove.
Quoted 53 lines
Quoted 53 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +8
-0+ + dl_se->server_state =DL_SERVER_DEFER ; +start_dl_timer (dl_se); +return ; + } +if (!dl_server (dl_se)) { dl_se->dl_server =1 ;setup_new_dl_entity (dl_se); } + + dl_se->server_state =DL_SERVER_RUNNING ;enqueue_dl_entity (dl_se,ENQUEUE_WAKEUP ); }kernel/sched/fair.c +0
-3@@ -6499,9 +6499,6 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)*/ util_est_enqueue (&rq->cfs, p); -if (!rq->cfs.h_nr_running) -dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server); -/* * If in_iowait is set, the code below may not trigger any cpufreq * utilization updates, so do it here explicitly with the IOWAIT flag kernel/sched/rt.c +6
-0@@ -1537,6 +1537,9 @@ enqueue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)if (!task_current (rq, p) && p->nr_cpus_allowed >1 )enqueue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_start (&rq->fair_server, rq->fair_server_defer); }static void dequeue_task_rt (struct rq *rq,struct task_struct *p,int flags)@@ -1547,6 +1550,9 @@ static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)dequeue_rt_entity (rt_se, flags);dequeue_pushable_task (rq, p); + +if (!sched_fair_server_needed (rq)) +dl_server_stop (&rq->fair_server); }
Quoted 5 lines
kernel/sched/rt.c static void dequeue_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags) · line 1558
Quoted 1 line
kernel/sched/rt.c +0
-0/* I'm thinking this is wrong -- ISTR there definite benefits to explicit slack time scheduling, meaning the server should also run while DL tasks are on.
I can add the check to enable it also in the presence of DL tasks, we just need to have consider that the dl server is a dl task as well when disabling.
It is a benefit because it will fix the case in which a CPU full of DL tasks (possible with global).
Additionally, running the server when there are only fair tasks
Quoted 1 line
is mostly harmless, right? So why this change?
Rhe problem is that we never know when a RT one will arrive :-/
E.g., only fair tasks, server enabled. All fine :-) Then an RT arrives, and gets postponed by the server... RT people complaining (for those thinking on adding a server for RT, we will have a similar problem as we have with throttling today + DL has no fixed priority).
We will still face the same problem with defferable server, and the example is the same, just with a shift in the RT arrival. e.g., only fair task for (server period - runtime), then the server gets enabled, and a 1us after the RT arrives and gets postponed... again.
So the need to enable it only after the dispatch of a kind of RT (or DL to be added) tasks that can cause starvation.
We could simplify it by enabling only on RT/DL arrival but... if there is nothing to starve... it is not needed anyways so less overhead avoiding the enqueue...
Quoted 4 lines
One of the benefits was -- IIRC, that we no longer need to subtract some random margin from the reservation limit, but there were more I think.
We can simplify things because we can start ignoring the rt throttling limit when there is no need to throttle... like on grub (but, only after we remove the rt throttling).
Thoughts?
-- Daniel
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 12 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 11 lines · Peter Zijlstra
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1457
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/deadline.c +9
-0+void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int defer) { +if (dl_se->server_state !=DL_SERVER_STOPPED ) { +WARN_ON_ONCE (!(on_dl_rq (dl_se) || dl_se->dl_throttled)); +return ; + } + +if (defer) { +/* +* Postpone the replenishment to the (next period - the execution time)
perhaps explicitly mention zero-laxity here, then we all know what is meant, no?
Quoted 25 lines
Quoted 16 lines
Quoted 16 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +16
-0+* +* With this in place, we have two cases: +* +* On the absence of DL tasks: +* The server will start at the replenishment time, getting +* its runtime before now + period. This is the expected +* throttling behavior. +* +* In the presense of DL tasks: +* The server will be replenished, and then it will be +* schedule according to EDF, not breaking SCHED_DEADLINE. +* +* In the first cycle the server will be postponed at most +* at period + period - runtime at most. But then the +* server will receive its runtime/period. +* Quoted 8 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1477
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+* The server will, however, run on top of any RT task, which +* is the expected throttling behavior. +*/ + dl_se->deadline =rq_clock (dl_se->rq) + dl_se->dl_period - dl_se->dl_runtime;I was confused by this, but this is an instance of
replenish_dl_new_period(), where we explicitly do not preserve the period.
Quoted 2 lines
yeah, it is two operations in one (so not straight forward). It sets the period as the now - runtime, so..
Right. I'll just attribute it to me being generally confused about everything after holidays ;-)
The thing that tripped me was that the use of rq_clock() breaks periodicy, except of course you want/need that when you start a new activation.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1481
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+/* Zero the runtime */ + dl_se->runtime =0 ; +/* throttle the server */ + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ;as the server is throttled, it will set the replenishing timer for now - runtime + period because of the deadline.
Yeah, it's a wee hack to move it to the zero-laxity point. I was considering if it makes sense to push that down and make it available for all DL tasks, but I'm not sure..
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I'm thinking this is wrong -- ISTR there definite benefits to explicit slack time scheduling, meaning the server should also run while DL tasks are on.
I can add the check to enable it also in the presence of DL tasks, we just need to have consider that the dl server is a dl task as well when disabling.
Why not keep what was there, always run the thing when there's FAIR tasks around? Or do you see severe overhead from running it with only FAIR tasks on?
Quoted 4 lines
It is a benefit because it will fix the case in which a CPU full of DL tasks (possible with global).
Additionally, running the server when there are only fair tasks
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
is mostly harmless, right? So why this change?
Rhe problem is that we never know when a RT one will arrive :-/
E.g., only fair tasks, server enabled. All fine :-) Then an RT arrives, and gets postponed by the server... RT people complaining (for those thinking on adding a server for RT, we will have a similar problem as we have with throttling today + DL has no fixed priority).
Well, the thing is, the moment you run DL tasks on that machine those RT tasks will get delayed *anyway*. RT people need to stop pretending FIFO is the highest class.
But yeah, I can see why they might get upset if the time is then used to run FAIR tasks while their RT task gets to wait.
Quoted 9 lines
We will still face the same problem with defferable server, and the example is the same, just with a shift in the RT arrival. e.g., only fair task for (server period - runtime), then the server gets enabled, and a 1us after the RT arrives and gets postponed... again.
So the need to enable it only after the dispatch of a kind of RT (or DL to be added) tasks that can cause starvation.
We could simplify it by enabling only on RT/DL arrival but... if there is nothing to starve... it is not needed anyways so less overhead avoiding the enqueue...
So one thing we could do is have update_curr_fair() decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).
That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 4 lines
One of the benefits was -- IIRC, that we no longer need to subtract some random margin from the reservation limit, but there were more I think.
We can simplify things because we can start ignoring the rt throttling limit when there is no need to throttle... like on grub (but, only after we remove the rt throttling).
Thoughts?
The moment the fair server is there (these patches) you should also kill the throttling. It doesn't make sense to have both.
Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 16 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 12 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 11 lines · Peter Zijlstra
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1457
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/deadline.c +9
-0+void dl_server_start (struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se,int defer) { +if (dl_se->server_state !=DL_SERVER_STOPPED ) { +WARN_ON_ONCE (!(on_dl_rq (dl_se) || dl_se->dl_throttled)); +return ; + } + +if (defer) { +/* +* Postpone the replenishment to the (next period - the execution time) perhaps explicitly mention zero-laxity here, then we all know what is meant, no?
Last time I used that word it caused more problems than helped :-) But I will add it and specify that is "for this task".
Quoted 28 lines
Quoted 25 lines
Quoted 16 lines
Quoted 16 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +16
-0+* +* With this in place, we have two cases: +* +* On the absence of DL tasks: +* The server will start at the replenishment time, getting +* its runtime before now + period. This is the expected +* throttling behavior. +* +* In the presense of DL tasks: +* The server will be replenished, and then it will be +* schedule according to EDF, not breaking SCHED_DEADLINE. +* +* In the first cycle the server will be postponed at most +* at period + period - runtime at most. But then the +* server will receive its runtime/period. +* Quoted 8 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1477
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+* The server will, however, run on top of any RT task, which +* is the expected throttling behavior. +*/ + dl_se->deadline =rq_clock (dl_se->rq) + dl_se->dl_period - dl_se->dl_runtime;I was confused by this, but this is an instance of
replenish_dl_new_period(), where we explicitly do not preserve the period.Quoted 2 lines
yeah, it is two operations in one (so not straight forward). It sets the period as the now - runtime, so..
Quoted 6 lines
Right. I'll just attribute it to me being generally confused about everything after holidays ;-)
The thing that tripped me was that the use of
rq_clock()breaks periodicy, except of course you want/need that when you start a new activation.
that rq_clock() is only used at the time in which we start the deferred server. If the throttling condition stays one, the server will act as a regular periodic DL task...
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c void dl_server_update(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, s64 delta_exec) · line 1481
Quoted 5 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +4
-0+/* Zero the runtime */ + dl_se->runtime =0 ; +/* throttle the server */ + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ;as the server is throttled, it will set the replenishing timer for now - runtime + period because of the deadline.
Quoted 3 lines
Yeah, it's a wee hack to move it to the zero-laxity point. I was considering if it makes sense to push that down and make it available for all DL tasks, but I'm not sure..
It might be useful in the future, like when DL dominates all other schedulers, so we can have a way to schedule a deferred work, like kworkers... :-) But it might be too early for that..
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I'm thinking this is wrong -- ISTR there definite benefits to explicit slack time scheduling, meaning the server should also run while DL tasks are on.
I can add the check to enable it also in the presence of DL tasks, we just need to have consider that the dl server is a dl task as well when disabling.
Why not keep what was there, always run the thing when there's FAIR tasks around? Or do you see severe overhead from running it with only FAIR tasks on?
Assuming that most of the cases people only have fair tasks, which is probably true in the regular kernel... (like, no threaded IRQs).
Quoted 13 lines
Quoted 4 lines
It is a benefit because it will fix the case in which a CPU full of DL tasks (possible with global).
Additionally, running the server when there are only fair tasks
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
is mostly harmless, right? So why this change?
Rhe problem is that we never know when a RT one will arrive :-/
E.g., only fair tasks, server enabled. All fine :-) Then an RT arrives, and gets postponed by the server... RT people complaining (for those thinking on adding a server for RT, we will have a similar problem as we have with throttling today + DL has no fixed priority).
Quoted 6 lines
Well, the thing is, the moment you run DL tasks on that machine those RT tasks will get delayed *anyway*. RT people need to stop pretending FIFO is the highest class.
But yeah, I can see why they might get upset if the time is then used to run FAIR tasks while their RT task gets to wait.
right
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 9 lines
We will still face the same problem with defferable server, and the example is the same, just with a shift in the RT arrival. e.g., only fair task for (server period - runtime), then the server gets enabled, and a 1us after the RT arrives and gets postponed... again.
So the need to enable it only after the dispatch of a kind of RT (or DL to be added) tasks that can cause starvation.
We could simplify it by enabling only on RT/DL arrival but... if there is nothing to starve... it is not needed anyways so less overhead avoiding the enqueue...
Quoted 7 lines
So one thing we could do is have
update_curr_fair()decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
We can also decrease the runtime to a negative number while in defer/throttle state, and let the while in replenish_dl_entity() to replenish with the += runtime;
here:
--- %< ---
/*
* We keep moving the deadline away until we get some
* available runtime for the entity. This ensures correct
* handling of situations where the runtime overrun is
* arbitrary large.
*/
while (dl_se->runtime <= 0) {
dl_se->deadline += pi_of(dl_se)->dl_period;
dl_se->runtime += pi_of(dl_se)->dl_runtime;
}--- >% ---
it is already done... no?
Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 5 lines
One of the benefits was -- IIRC, that we no longer need to subtract some random margin from the reservation limit, but there were more I think.
We can simplify things because we can start ignoring the rt throttling limit when there is no need to throttle... like on grub (but, only after we remove the rt throttling).
Thoughts?
The moment the fair server is there (these patches) you should also kill the throttling. It doesn't make sense to have both.
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 7 lines
So one thing we could do is have
update_curr_fair()decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
We can also decrease the runtime to a negative number while in defer/throttle state, and let the while in
replenish_dl_entity()to replenish with the += runtime;
Yes, but my point was that fair_server gives a lower bound of runtime per period, more -- if available -- is fine.
If we allow negative runtime, you'll affect future periods, and that is not desired in this case.
Or am I still confused?
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 14 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 7 lines
So one thing we could do is have
update_curr_fair()decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
We can also decrease the runtime to a negative number while in defer/throttle state, and let the while in
replenish_dl_entity()to replenish with the += runtime;
Quoted 7 lines
Yes, but my point was that
fair_servergives a lower bound of runtime per period, more -- if available -- is fine.If we allow negative runtime, you'll affect future periods, and that is not desired in this case.
Or am I still confused?
That is, let update_curr_fair() decrement fair_server runtime *unconditionally* -- even if the task was not selected through the server.
Specifically, if the fair task is selected normally due to lack of deadline tasks, that runtime *still* counts towards the fair-server and have the server yield the period when zero.
This means that fair_server is only effective IFF 'normal' execution doesn't match the fair_server.runtime execution.
Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 18 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 17 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 7 lines
So one thing we could do is have
update_curr_fair()decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
We can also decrease the runtime to a negative number while in defer/throttle state, and let the while in
replenish_dl_entity()to replenish with the += runtime;Yes, but my point was that
fair_servergives a lower bound of runtime per period, more -- if available -- is fine.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
If we allow negative runtime, you'll affect future periods, and that is not desired in this case.
Or am I still confused?
That is, let
update_curr_fair()decrementfair_serverruntime *unconditionally* -- even if the task was not selected through the server.
Ah, I see! but then we would have to also consider the period, and control a period... without SCHED_DEADLINE watching us...
I was considering only the "waiting for the 0-lag time to start running (after being armed)"
If there is no need for the server to be armed... do nothing :-) If it is armed, reduce the amount of time the fair server could get.
Quoted 6 lines
Specifically, if the fair task is selected normally due to lack of deadline tasks, that runtime *still* counts towards the fair-server and have the server yield the period when zero.
This means that
fair_serveris only effective IFF 'normal' execution doesn't match the fair_server.runtime execution.
I see! I *think* it will cause more overhead than doing nothing unless there is something that can cause starvation. But I need to think more.
-- Daniel
Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
In reply to Peter ZijlstraQuoted 6 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 4 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 4 lines
So one thing we could do is have
update_curr_fair()decrement fair_server's runtime and yield the period then it hits 0 (and capping it at 0, not allowing it to go negative or so).
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
That way you only force the situation when FAIR hasn't had it's allotted time this perio, and only for as much as to make up for the time it lacks.
We can also decrease the runtime to a negative number while in defer/throttle state, and let the while in
replenish_dl_entity()to replenish with the += runtime;
Repying in the sequence...but mostly to try to understand/explain my point (we might even be in agreement, but touching different parts of the code).
Quoted 2 lines
Yes, but my point was that
fair_servergives a lower bound of runtime per period, more -- if available -- is fine.
I am targeting that as well, and it works for the case in which we have only RT tasks causing starvation.
If we have other DL tasks, we cannot force the fair server to run till completion because it would add a U=1 to the system. Like, if we have a 50ms server runtime... BOOM, we will miss lots of regular DL tasks deadline with 1 ms period. I do not think it is worth to break deadline to give fair server time immediately. So, the fair server is scheduled as a periodic DL task.
After the initial defer state, the DL server will get the runtime/period even with the CPU load of DL tasks. But:
- We do not have such high load of DL tasks as well
- If one cares about it more, they can reduce the runtime/period granularity to mitigate the defer time
- If one do not care about RT tasks, just disable the defer mechanism
So I think we are well covered, without having to break the basis of CBS+EDF assumptions (like that task will not add a higher load than U).
Quoted 2 lines
If we allow negative runtime, you'll affect future periods, and that is not desired in this case.
I think that I need to clarify this. I was thinking on this case:
- Fair server deffered
- If the server gets some time to run while waiting for the 0-lax we decrease the runtime...
- When the defer starts, the replenish will happen, and will += runtime, giving it the correct proportional time left for the period the timer was armed. So it is not the next period, it is the delayed period.
So I think we are thinking the same thing... just with a shift.
Quoted 3 lines
Or am I still confused?
You are not alone... there are many states and I fear that I might be focusing on a different state.
-- Daniel
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraQuoted 7 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 3 lines
Yeah, it's a wee hack to move it to the zero-laxity point. I was considering if it makes sense to push that down and make it available for all DL tasks, but I'm not sure..
It might be useful in the future, like when DL dominates all other schedulers, so we can have a way to schedule a deferred work, like kworkers... :-) But it might be too early for that..
So... that scheme I was pushing where we unconditionally decrement fair_server.dl_runtime from update_curr_fair(), that relies on it being a proper zero-laxity scheduler, and doesn't work with the proposed defer hack.
That is, it relies on dl_runtime > 0 during throttle, and you explicitly set it 0.
Now, I've not looked at all this code in detail in a minute, but would not something like the below work?
AFAICT the regular dl_task_timer() callback works to make it go, because replenish will see positive runtime (or not, when already consumed) and DTRT.
include/linux/sched.h +1 -0
@@ -657,6 +657,7 @@ struct sched_dl_entity { unsigned int dl_non_contending : 1; unsigned int dl_overrun : 1; unsigned int dl_server : 1; + unsigned int dl_zerolax : 1;/* * Bandwidth enforcement timer. Each -deadline task has its
kernel/sched/deadline.c +23 -1
@@ -895,6 +895,16 @@ static void replenish_dl_entity(struct s dl_se->dl_yielded =0 ;if (dl_se->dl_throttled) dl_se->dl_throttled =0 ; + +/* +* If this is a zero-laxity task, and we're before the zero-laxity +* point, throttle it. +*/ +if (dl_se->dl_zerolax && +dl_time_before (dl_se->deadline - dl_se->runtime,rq_clock (rq))) { +if (!is_dl_boosted (dl_se) &&start_dl_timer (dl_se)) + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ; + } }/*
@@ -1078,7 +1088,12 @@ static int start_dl_timer(struct sched_d* that it is actually coming from rq->clock and not from * hrtimer's time base reading. */ - act =ns_to_ktime (dl_next_period (dl_se)); +if (dl_se->dl_zerolax && !dl_se->dl_throttled) { + act =ns_to_ktime (dl_se->deadline - dl_se->runtime); + }else { + act =ns_to_ktime (dl_next_period (dl_se)); + } + now =hrtimer_cb_get_time (timer); delta =ktime_to_ns (now) -rq_clock (rq); act =ktime_add_ns (act, delta);
@@ -1794,6 +1809,13 @@ enqueue_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entitysetup_new_dl_entity (dl_se); } +/* +* If we are still throttled, eg. we got replenished but are a +* zero-laxity task and still got to wait, don't enqueue. +*/ +if (dl_se->dl_throttled) +return ; +__enqueue_dl_entity (dl_se); }
Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 76 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 7 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 3 lines
Yeah, it's a wee hack to move it to the zero-laxity point. I was considering if it makes sense to push that down and make it available for all DL tasks, but I'm not sure..
It might be useful in the future, like when DL dominates all other schedulers, so we can have a way to schedule a deferred work, like kworkers... :-) But it might be too early for that..
So... that scheme I was pushing where we unconditionally decrement fair_server.dl_runtime from
update_curr_fair(), that relies on it being a proper zero-laxity scheduler, and doesn't work with the proposed defer hack.That is, it relies on
dl_runtime> 0 during throttle, and you explicitly set it 0.Now, I've not looked at all this code in detail in a minute, but would not something like the below work?
AFAICT the regular
dl_task_timer()callback works to make it go, because replenish will see positive runtime (or not, when already consumed) and DTRT.Index:
linux-2.6/include/linux/sched.h
===================================================================include/linux/sched.h +1
-0@@ -657,6 +657,7 @@ struct sched_dl_entity { unsigned int dl_non_contending : 1; unsigned int dl_overrun : 1; unsigned int dl_server : 1; + unsigned int dl_zerolax : 1;/* * Bandwidth enforcement timer. Each -deadline task has its Index:
linux-2.6/kernel/sched/deadline.c
===================================================================kernel/sched/deadline.c +16
-1@@ -895,6 +895,16 @@ static void replenish_dl_entity(struct s dl_se->dl_yielded =0 ;if (dl_se->dl_throttled) dl_se->dl_throttled =0 ; + +/* +* If this is a zero-laxity task, and we're before the zero-laxity +* point, throttle it. +*/ +if (dl_se->dl_zerolax && +dl_time_before (dl_se->deadline - dl_se->runtime,rq_clock (rq))) { +if (!is_dl_boosted (dl_se) &&start_dl_timer (dl_se)) + dl_se->dl_throttled =1 ; + } }/* @@ -1078,7 +1088,12 @@ static int start_dl_timer(struct sched_d* that it is actually coming from rq->clock and not from * hrtimer's time base reading. */ - act =ns_to_ktime (dl_next_period (dl_se)); +if (dl_se->dl_zerolax && !dl_se->dl_throttled) { + act =ns_to_ktime (dl_se->deadline - dl_se->runtime); + }else { + act =ns_to_ktime (dl_next_period (dl_se)); + } + now =hrtimer_cb_get_time (timer); delta =ktime_to_ns (now) -rq_clock (rq); act =ktime_add_ns (act, delta);@@ -1794,6 +1809,13 @@ enqueue_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entitysetup_new_dl_entity (dl_se); }
kernel/sched/deadline.c enqueue_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity · line 1820
Quoted 10 lines
kernel/sched/deadline.c +7
-0+/* +* If we are still throttled, eg. we got replenished but are a +* zero-laxity task and still got to wait, don't enqueue. +*/ +if (dl_se->dl_throttled) +return ; +__enqueue_dl_entity (dl_se); }
Let me see if I got it:
- Always start the server, but throttled with full runtime...
- Unconditionally decrement fair_server.dl_runtime from update_curr_fair() (check if it is not decremented twice as it runs)
- When the dl timer fire, replenish or throttle for the next period?
is that the base for it?
-- Daniel
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server
Quoted 8 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Let me see if I got it:
- Always start the server, but throttled with full runtime...
- Unconditionally decrement fair_server.dl_runtime fromupdate_curr_fair()(check if it is not decremented twice as it runs)
- When the dl timer fire, replenish or throttle for the next period?is that the base for it?
Yes. So if dl timer fires and it still has runtime replenish will not move the deadline and it will become eligible to run. If it has 0 runtime, replenish does it's thing, ups runtime and moves the deadline forward and then the zero-laxity condition will re-throttle, goto 1 etc..
PATCH v4 7/7 sched/fair: Fair server interface
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraAdd an interface for fair server setup on debugfs.
Each rq have three file under /sys/kernel/debug/sched/rq/CPU{ID}:
- fair_server_runtime: set runtime in ns
- fair_server_period: set period in ns
- fair_server_defer: on/off for the defer mechanism
--- kernel/sched/debug.c | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 177 insertions(+)
kernel/sched/debug.c +177 -0
@@ -333,8 +333,183 @@ static const struct file_operations sched_debug_fops = { .release = seq_release, }; +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_runtime_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 runtime; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &runtime); +if (err) +return err; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (runtime > rq->fair_server.dl_period) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_runtime = runtime; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_runtime_show (struct seq_file *m,void *v) +{ +unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long ) m->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); + +seq_printf (m,"%llu\n" , rq->fair_server.dl_runtime); +return 0 ; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_runtime_open (struct inode *inode,struct file *filp) +{ +return single_open (filp, sched_fair_server_runtime_show, inode->i_private); +} + +static const struct file_operations fair_server_runtime_fops = { + .open = sched_fair_server_runtime_open, + .write = sched_fair_server_runtime_write, + .read = seq_read, + .llseek = seq_lseek, + .release = single_release, +}; + +static unsigned int fair_server_period_max = (1 <<22 ) *NSEC_PER_USEC ;/* ~4 seconds */ +static unsigned int fair_server_period_min = (100 ) *NSEC_PER_USEC ;/* 100 us */ + +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_period_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 period; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &period); +if (err) +return err; + +if (period < fair_server_period_min || period > fair_server_period_max) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (period < rq->fair_server.dl_runtime) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_period = period; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_period_show (struct seq_file *m,void *v) +{ +unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long ) m->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); + +seq_printf (m,"%llu\n" , rq->fair_server.dl_period); +return 0 ; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_period_open (struct inode *inode,struct file *filp) +{ +return single_open (filp, sched_fair_server_period_show, inode->i_private); +} + +static const struct file_operations fair_server_period_fops = { + .open = sched_fair_server_period_open, + .write = sched_fair_server_period_write, + .read = seq_read, + .llseek = seq_lseek, + .release = single_release, +}; + +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_defer_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 defer; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &defer); +if (err) +return err; + +if (defer <0 || defer >1 ) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); + rq->fair_server_defer = defer; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_defer_show (struct seq_file *m,void *v) +{ +unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long ) m->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); + +seq_printf (m,"%d\n" , rq->fair_server_defer); +return 0 ; +} + +static int sched_fair_server_defer_open (struct inode *inode,struct file *filp) +{ +return single_open (filp, sched_fair_server_defer_show, inode->i_private); +} + +static const struct file_operations fair_server_defer_fops = { + .open = sched_fair_server_defer_open, + .write = sched_fair_server_defer_write, + .read = seq_read, + .llseek = seq_lseek, + .release = single_release, +}; +static struct dentry *debugfs_sched; +void debugfs_fair_server_init (void ) +{ +long cpu; +struct dentry *rq_dentry; + + rq_dentry =debugfs_create_dir ("rq" , debugfs_sched); +if (!rq_dentry) +return ; + +for_each_possible_cpu (cpu) { +struct dentry *d_cpu; +char buf[32 ]; + +snprintf (buf,sizeof (buf),"cpu%ld" , cpu); + d_cpu =debugfs_create_dir (buf, rq_dentry); + +debugfs_create_file ("fair_server_runtime" ,0644 , d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_runtime_fops); +debugfs_create_file ("fair_server_period" ,0644 , d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_period_fops); +debugfs_create_file ("fair_server_defer" ,0644 , d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_defer_fops); + } +} +static __init int sched_init_debug (void ) {struct dentry __maybe_unused *numa;
@@ -374,6 +549,8 @@ static __init int sched_init_debug(void)debugfs_create_file ("debug" ,0444 , debugfs_sched,NULL , &sched_debug_fops); +debugfs_fair_server_init (); +return 0 ; }late_initcall (sched_init_debug);
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1
kernel test robot
build botRe: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
Hi Daniel,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on tip/sched/core]
[also build test WARNING on tip/master linus/master next-20230831] [cannot apply to tip/auto-latest v6.5]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Daniel-Bristot-de-Oliveira/sched-Unify-runtime-accounting-across-classes/20230901-043307 base: tip/sched/core patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/db775d65b18ddac4a75faad6761c6c2abf3efb78.1693510979.git.bristot%40kernel.org patch subject: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface config: m68k-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230901/[email protected]/config) compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230901/[email protected]/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
In file included from kernel/sched/build_utility.c:73:
>> kernel/sched/debug.c:386:56: warning: integer overflow in expression of type 'long int' results in '-100663296' [-Woverflow]
386 | static unsigned int fair_server_period_max = (1 << 22) * NSEC_PER_USEC; /* ~4 seconds */
| ^
>> kernel/sched/debug.c:491:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'debugfs_fair_server_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 491 | void debugfs_fair_server_init(void)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
vim +386 kernel/sched/debug.c
385
> 386 static unsigned int fair_server_period_max = (1 << 22) * NSEC_PER_USEC; /* ~4 seconds */
387 static unsigned int fair_server_period_min = (100) * NSEC_PER_USEC; /* 100 us */
388
389 static ssize_t
390 sched_fair_server_period_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *ubuf,
391 size_t cnt, loff_t *ppos)
392 {
393 long cpu = (long) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private;
394 struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
395 unsigned long flags;
396 u64 period;
397 int err;
398
399 err = kstrtoull_from_user(ubuf, cnt, 10, &period);
400 if (err)
401 return err;
402
403 if (period < fair_server_period_min || period > fair_server_period_max)
404 return -EINVAL;
405
406 raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave(rq, flags);
407 if (period < rq->fair_server.dl_runtime)
408 err = -EINVAL;
409 else
410 rq->fair_server.dl_period = period;
411 raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, flags);
412
413 if (err)
414 return err;
415
416 *ppos += cnt;
417 return cnt;
418 }
419
420 static int sched_fair_server_period_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
421 {
422 unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long) m->private;
423 struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
424
425 seq_printf(m, "%llu\n", rq->fair_server.dl_period);
426 return 0;
427 }
428
429 static int sched_fair_server_period_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
430 {
431 return single_open(filp, sched_fair_server_period_show, inode->i_private);
432 }
433
434 static const struct file_operations fair_server_period_fops = {
435 .open = sched_fair_server_period_open,
436 .write = sched_fair_server_period_write,
437 .read = seq_read,
438 .llseek = seq_lseek,
439 .release = single_release,
440 };
441
442 static ssize_t
443 sched_fair_server_defer_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *ubuf,
444 size_t cnt, loff_t *ppos)
445 {
446 long cpu = (long) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private;
447 struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
448 unsigned long flags;
449 u64 defer;
450 int err;
451
452 err = kstrtoull_from_user(ubuf, cnt, 10, &defer);
453 if (err)
454 return err;
455
456 if (defer < 0 || defer > 1)
457 return -EINVAL;
458
459 raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave(rq, flags);
460 rq->fair_server_defer = defer;
461 raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, flags);
462
463 *ppos += cnt;
464 return cnt;
465 }
466
467 static int sched_fair_server_defer_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
468 {
469 unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long) m->private;
470 struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
471
472 seq_printf(m, "%d\n", rq->fair_server_defer);
473 return 0;
474 }
475
476 static int sched_fair_server_defer_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
477 {
478 return single_open(filp, sched_fair_server_defer_show, inode->i_private);
479 }
480
481 static const struct file_operations fair_server_defer_fops = {
482 .open = sched_fair_server_defer_open,
483 .write = sched_fair_server_defer_write,
484 .read = seq_read,
485 .llseek = seq_lseek,
486 .release = single_release,
487 };
488
489 static struct dentry *debugfs_sched;
490
> 491 void debugfs_fair_server_init(void) 492 {
493 long cpu;
494 struct dentry *rq_dentry;
495
496 rq_dentry = debugfs_create_dir("rq", debugfs_sched);
497 if (!rq_dentry)
498 return;
499
500 for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
501 struct dentry *d_cpu;
502 char buf[32];
503
504 snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "cpu%ld", cpu);
505 d_cpu = debugfs_create_dir(buf, rq_dentry);
506
507 debugfs_create_file("fair_server_runtime", 0644, d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_runtime_fops);
508 debugfs_create_file("fair_server_period", 0644, d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_period_fops);
509 debugfs_create_file("fair_server_defer", 0644, d_cpu, (void *) cpu, &fair_server_defer_fops);
510 }
511 }
512
Signature · 2 lines
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
In reply to Daniel Bristot de OliveiraQuoted 73 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/debug.c +71
-0+static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_runtime_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 runtime; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &runtime); +if (err) +return err; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (runtime > rq->fair_server.dl_period) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_runtime = runtime; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_period_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 period; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &period); +if (err) +return err; + +if (period < fair_server_period_min || period > fair_server_period_max) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (period < rq->fair_server.dl_runtime) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_period = period; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_defer_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 defer; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &defer); +if (err) +return err; +
kernel/sched/debug.c static const struct file_operations sched_debug_fops = { · line 465
Quoted 10 lines
kernel/sched/debug.c +10
-0+if (defer <0 || defer >1 ) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); + rq->fair_server_defer = defer; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +}
Surely we can write a single function that does all of that with less duplication?
Additionally, should not the deadline parameters be vetted by access control before being accepted ?
Perhaps something like so:
static ssize_tsched_fair_server_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *ubuf, size_t cnt, loff_t *ppos, enum dl_param param)
{
long cpu = (long) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private;
struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
u64 value;
err = kstrtoull_from_user(ubuf, cnt, 10, &value);
if (err)
return err;
scoped_guard (rq_lock_irqsave, rq) {
u64 runtime, deadline, period;
runtime = rq->fair_server.dl_runtime;
deadline = rq->fair_server.dl_deadline;
period = rq->fair_server.dl_period;
switch (param) {
case dl_runtime: runtime = value; break;
case dl_deadline: deadline = value; break;
case dl_period: period = value; break;
}
if (runtime > deadline ||
deadline > period ||
/* more stuff like access controll */)
return -EINVAL;
rq->fair_server.dl_runtime = runtime;
rq->fair_server.dl_deadline = deadline;
rq->fair_server.dl_period = period;
}
*ppos += cnt;
return cnt;
}Re: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
Quoted 79 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 78 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
kernel/sched/debug.c +76
-0+static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_runtime_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 runtime; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &runtime); +if (err) +return err; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (runtime > rq->fair_server.dl_period) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_runtime = runtime; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_period_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 period; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &period); +if (err) +return err; + +if (period < fair_server_period_min || period > fair_server_period_max) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); +if (period < rq->fair_server.dl_runtime) + err = -EINVAL ; +else + rq->fair_server.dl_period = period; +raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + +if (err) +return err; + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +} +static ssize_t +sched_fair_server_defer_write (struct file *filp,const char __user *ubuf, +size_t cnt,loff_t *ppos) +{ +long cpu = (long ) ((struct seq_file *) filp->private_data)->private; +struct rq *rq =cpu_rq (cpu); +unsigned long flags; +u64 defer; +int err; + + err =kstrtoull_from_user (ubuf, cnt,10 , &defer); +if (err) +return err; + +if (defer <0 || defer >1 ) +return -EINVAL ; + +raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave (rq, flags); + rq->fair_server_defer = defer;
Quoted 8 lines
kernel/sched/debug.c static const struct file_operations sched_debug_fops = { · line 362
Quoted 5 lines
kernel/sched/debug.c +5
-0+raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore (rq, flags); + + *ppos += cnt; +return cnt; +}Surely we can write a single function that does all of that with less duplication?
I agree, I will use your code as starting point for that...
Quoted 3 lines
Additionally, should not the deadline parameters be vetted by access control before being accepted ?
like security_task_getscheduler(p)? But we have no p...
I checked rt throttling, but it seems that it does not check. Do you have a pointer?
-- Daniel
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
Quoted 4 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 2 lines
Additionally, should not the deadline parameters be vetted by access control before being accepted ?
like
security_task_getscheduler(p)? But we have no p...
I was thinking sched_dl_overflow() or thereabout. That still runs on p, but I'm thikning that should be easily adapted to dl_se or somesuch.
Peter Zijlstra
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 7/7] sched/fair: Fair server interface
Quoted 9 lines · Peter Zijlstra
Quoted 4 lines · Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
Quoted 2 lines
Additionally, should not the deadline parameters be vetted by access control before being accepted ?
like
security_task_getscheduler(p)? But we have no p...I was thinking
sched_dl_overflow()or thereabout. That still runs on p, but I'm thikning that should be easily adapted todl_seor somesuch.
Clearly my scrambled brain confused admission control and access control.