mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: rearm hrtick timer when it's senseful
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 18:41:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1476841279-21958-1-git-send-email-joonwoop@codeaurora.org> (raw)

When a new cfs task enqueued, fair scheduler rearms current cfs task's
hrtick expiration time with decreased slice.  But the slice stops
decreasing eventually when it reached sched_min_granularity.
Consequently cfs scheduler also stops rearming of hrtick timer because
hrtick expiration time for the current cfs task doesn't change.  This
is a legitimate optimization but there is a subtle error in the 'if'
condition so at present cfs scheduler stops rearming of hrtick timer
earlier than ideal that will cause a subtle unfairness.

 When sched_latency = 6ms, sched_min_granularity = 0.75ms,
 sched_nr_latency = 8 :

   nr_run  slice    period
   1       6.00 ms  6 ms
   2       3.00 ms  6 ms
   3       4.50 ms  6 ms
   4       1.50 ms  6 ms
   5       1.20 ms  6 ms
   6       1.00 ms  6 ms
   7       0.85 ms  6 ms
   8       0.75 ms  6 ms
   9+      0.75 ms  6.75ms

The first time when sched_slice becomes equal to sched_min_granularity
is when cfs_rq's nr_running becomes equal to sched_nr_latency.  Fix
the condition to rearm the hrtick nr_running up to sched_nr_latency.

Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
---
 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 71c08a8..f465448 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4507,7 +4507,7 @@ static void hrtick_update(struct rq *rq)
 	if (!hrtick_enabled(rq) || curr->sched_class != &fair_sched_class)
 		return;
 
-	if (cfs_rq_of(&curr->se)->nr_running < sched_nr_latency)
+	if (cfs_rq_of(&curr->se)->nr_running <= sched_nr_latency)
 		hrtick_start_fair(rq, curr);
 }
 #else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK */
-- 
2.9.3

             reply	other threads:[~2016-10-19  1:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-19  1:41 Joonwoo Park [this message]
2016-10-19  1:41 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: avoid unnecessary hrtick rearm when it's possible Joonwoo Park

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=1476841279-21958-1-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=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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