From: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Fix SCHED_HRTICK bug leading to late preemption of tasks
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:28:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1474075731-11550-1-git-send-email-joonwoop@codeaurora.org> (raw)
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>
SCHED_HRTICK feature is useful to preempt SCHED_FAIR tasks on-the-dot
(just when they would have exceeded their ideal_runtime). It makes use
of a per-cpu hrtimer resource and hence alarming that hrtimer should
be based on total SCHED_FAIR tasks a cpu has across its various cfs_rqs,
rather than being based on number of tasks in a particular cfs_rq (as
implemented currently). As a result, with current code, its possible for
a running task (which is the sole task in its cfs_rq) to be preempted
much after its ideal_runtime has elapsed, resulting in increased latency
for tasks in other cfs_rq on same cpu.
Fix this by alarming sched hrtimer based on total number of SCHED_FAIR
tasks a CPU has across its various cfs_rqs.
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
---
joonwoop: Do we also need to update or remove if-statement inside
hrtick_update()?
I guess not because hrtick_update() doesn't want to start hrtick when cfs_rq
has large number of nr_running where slice is longer than sched_latency.
kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 4088eed..c55c566 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4458,7 +4458,7 @@ static void hrtick_start_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
WARN_ON(task_rq(p) != rq);
- if (cfs_rq->nr_running > 1) {
+ if (rq->cfs.h_nr_running > 1) {
u64 slice = sched_slice(cfs_rq, se);
u64 ran = se->sum_exec_runtime - se->prev_sum_exec_runtime;
s64 delta = slice - ran;
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
next reply other threads:[~2016-09-17 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-17 1:28 Joonwoo Park [this message]
2016-09-17 23:28 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-09-19 18:08 ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-19 23:30 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-09-19 8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-19 18:04 ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-19 18:17 ` Joonwoo Park
2016-09-22 14:01 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: " tip-bot for Srivatsa Vaddagiri
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=1474075731-11550-1-git-send-email-joonwoop@codeaurora.org \
--to=joonwoop@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vatsa@codeaurora.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
Powered by JetHome