mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
To: Stanislav Meduna <stano@meduna.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Unthrottle the highest RT task of the rq if there are no another available tasks to be picked
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:15:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1360671314.4657.234.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5119F967.3040302@meduna.org>

On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 09:12 +0100, Stanislav Meduna wrote: 
> On 12.02.2013 08:06, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> 
> >> In this case pick_next_task takes idle tasks and idle wastes cpu
> >> time.
> 
> > That's not a waste of CPU time, that's utilization enforcement the thing
> > it is designed to do.
> 
> Well this is a philosophical question and the opinions will IMHO
> vary strongly. If the throttling kicks in, the system already
> is in the out-of-spec state.

Exactly, please don't feed the wild eyed psychopaths ;-)

> Is the goal now just to allow
> e.g. the ssh login to be able to kill the task and still try
> to do the best if otherwise (possibly masking the problem for
> months), or is it to enforce the utilization?

Both.  It has two modes of enforcement, sane mode is I WILL constrain
this thing you turned loose should it acts up, and not so sane mode,
where borrowing a cup of CPU from the neighbors is ok.  Workqueues.

> For example we have a PLC software where the end-user develops
> an application that will be executed in our realtime task.
> The application usually has a longer initialization part where
> the excess utilization can happen and should be tolerated
> and the running part where it is a bug if it happens. Here
> I would prefer the throttling to alert the user, but not
> to actually throttle if there is no non-RT task actually
> wanting to run. In other cases I would maybe prefer even
> killing the task, alerting the user to the fact.

That's not in the throttles job description.  It's not a monitor and
report system, it's a constraint system for very dangerous beasts.

> I have a related question: is the information that the throttling
> happened available somewhere except the log (where it gets only
> written once)? If not, would a patch exporting the count
> of throttlings via /sys be accepted?

I'm not the maintainer, so can't say.  Seems to me a trace point would
be better though.

-Mike


  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-12 12:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-11 21:31 Kirill Tkhai
2013-02-12  7:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-02-12  8:12   ` Stanislav Meduna
2013-02-12 12:15     ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2013-02-12 14:46   ` Steven Rostedt

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=1360671314.4657.234.camel@marge.simpson.net \
    --to=bitbucket@online.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stano@meduna.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®