mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
Subject: [RFC v2 4/7] Fix the update of the total -deadline utilization
Date: Fri,  1 Apr 2016 17:12:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1459523553-29089-5-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459523553-29089-1-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it>

Now that the inactive timer can be armed to fire at the 0-lag time,
it is possible to use inactive_task_timer() to update the total
-deadline utilization (dl_b->total_bw) at the correct time, fixing
dl_overflow() and __setparam_dl().

Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c     | 36 ++++++++++++------------------------
 kernel/sched/deadline.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 23d235c..4158d1f 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2347,9 +2347,6 @@ static inline int dl_bw_cpus(int i)
  * allocated bandwidth to reflect the new situation.
  *
  * This function is called while holding p's rq->lock.
- *
- * XXX we should delay bw change until the task's 0-lag point, see
- * __setparam_dl().
  */
 static int dl_overflow(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
 		       const struct sched_attr *attr)
@@ -2377,11 +2374,22 @@ static int dl_overflow(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
 		err = 0;
 	} else if (dl_policy(policy) && task_has_dl_policy(p) &&
 		   !__dl_overflow(dl_b, cpus, p->dl.dl_bw, new_bw)) {
+		/*
+		 * XXX this is slightly incorrect: when the task
+		 * utilization decreases, we should delay the total
+		 * utilization change until the task's 0-lag point.
+		 * But this would require to set the task's "inactive
+		 * timer" when the task is not inactive.
+		 */
 		__dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
 		__dl_add(dl_b, new_bw);
 		err = 0;
 	} else if (!dl_policy(policy) && task_has_dl_policy(p)) {
-		__dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
+		/*
+		 * Do not decrease the total deadline utilization here,
+		 * switched_from_dl() will take care to do it at the correct
+		 * (0-lag) time.
+		 */
 		err = 0;
 	}
 	raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
@@ -3647,26 +3655,6 @@ __setparam_dl(struct task_struct *p, const struct sched_attr *attr)
 	dl_se->dl_period = attr->sched_period ?: dl_se->dl_deadline;
 	dl_se->flags = attr->sched_flags;
 	dl_se->dl_bw = to_ratio(dl_se->dl_period, dl_se->dl_runtime);
-
-	/*
-	 * Changing the parameters of a task is 'tricky' and we're not doing
-	 * the correct thing -- also see task_dead_dl() and switched_from_dl().
-	 *
-	 * What we SHOULD do is delay the bandwidth release until the 0-lag
-	 * point. This would include retaining the task_struct until that time
-	 * and change dl_overflow() to not immediately decrement the current
-	 * amount.
-	 *
-	 * Instead we retain the current runtime/deadline and let the new
-	 * parameters take effect after the current reservation period lapses.
-	 * This is safe (albeit pessimistic) because the 0-lag point is always
-	 * before the current scheduling deadline.
-	 *
-	 * We can still have temporary overloads because we do not delay the
-	 * change in bandwidth until that time; so admission control is
-	 * not on the safe side. It does however guarantee tasks will never
-	 * consume more than promised.
-	 */
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index 97cd5f2..ca7910a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -98,8 +98,14 @@ static void task_go_inactive(struct task_struct *p)
 	 */
 	if (ktime_us_delta(act, now) < 0) {
 		sub_running_bw(dl_se, dl_rq);
-		if (!dl_task(p))
+		if (!dl_task(p)) {
+			struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
+
+			raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
+			__dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
 			__dl_clear_params(p);
+			raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
+		}
 
 		return;
 	}
@@ -865,8 +871,13 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart inactive_task_timer(struct hrtimer *timer)
 
 	rq = task_rq_lock(p, &flags);
 
-	if (!dl_task(p)) {
+	if (!dl_task(p) || p->state == TASK_DEAD) {
+		struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
+
+		raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
+		__dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
 		__dl_clear_params(p);
+		raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
 
 		goto unlock;
 	}
@@ -1341,15 +1352,21 @@ static void task_fork_dl(struct task_struct *p)
 
 static void task_dead_dl(struct task_struct *p)
 {
-	struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
-
 	/*
 	 * Since we are TASK_DEAD we won't slip out of the domain!
 	 */
-	raw_spin_lock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
-	/* XXX we should retain the bw until 0-lag */
-	dl_b->total_bw -= p->dl.dl_bw;
-	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
+	if (!hrtimer_active(&p->dl.inactive_timer)) {
+		struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
+
+		/*
+		 * If the "inactive timer is not active, the 0-lag time
+		 * is already passed, so we immediately decrease the
+		 * total deadline utilization
+		 */
+		raw_spin_lock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
+		__dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
+		raw_spin_unlock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
+	}
 }
 
 static void set_curr_task_dl(struct rq *rq)
-- 
2.5.0

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-01 15:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-01 15:12 [RFC v2 0/7] CPU reclaiming for SCHED_DEADLINE Luca Abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 1/7] Track the active utilisation Luca Abeni
2016-04-05 12:23   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 16:47     ` luca abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 2/7] Correctly track the active utilisation for migrating tasks Luca Abeni
2016-04-05 12:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 16:50     ` luca abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 3/7] Improve the tracking of active utilisation Luca Abeni
2016-04-05 12:42   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 17:00     ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 12:42   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 17:05     ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 14:48   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 17:17     ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 15:00   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 17:56     ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 18:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 19:35         ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 18:02       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 19:24         ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 19:31           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 19:32           ` luca abeni
2016-04-05 18:11       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-01 15:12 ` Luca Abeni [this message]
2016-04-05 12:58   ` [RFC v2 4/7] Fix the update of the total -deadline utilization Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-05 17:16     ` luca abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 5/7] GRUB accounting Luca Abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 6/7] Make GRUB a task's flag Luca Abeni
2016-04-01 15:12 ` [RFC v2 7/7] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Luca Abeni

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=1459523553-29089-5-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it \
    --to=luca.abeni@unitn.it \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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®