mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
To: bsegall@google.com
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC]  sched/fair: hard lockup in sched_cfs_period_timer
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190306162313.GB8786@pauld.bos.csb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xm261s3lyrrl.fsf@bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com>

On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 12:45:34PM -0800 bsegall@google.com wrote:
> Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Interestingly, if I limit the number of child cgroups to the number of 
> > them I'm actually putting processes into (16 down from 2500) the problem
> > does not reproduce.
> 
> That is indeed interesting, and definitely not something we'd want to
> matter. (Particularly if it's not root->a->b->c...->throttled_cgroup or
> root->throttled->a->...->thread vs root->throttled_cgroup, which is what
> I was originally thinking of)
> 

The locking may be a red herring.

The setup is root->throttled->a where a is 1-2500. There are 4 threads in
each of the first 16 a groups.  The parent, throttled, is where the 
cfs_period/quota_us are set. 

I wonder if the problem is the walk_tg_tree_from() call in unthrottle_cfs_rq(). 

The distribute_cfg_runtime looks to be O(n * m) where n is number of 
throttled cfs_rqs and m is the number of child cgroups. But I'm not 
completely clear on how the hierarchical cgroups play together here. 

I'll pull on this thread some. 

Thanks for your input.


Cheers,
Phil

-- 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-06 16:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-01 14:52 Phil Auld
2019-03-04 18:13 ` bsegall
2019-03-04 19:05   ` Phil Auld
2019-03-05 18:49     ` bsegall
2019-03-05 20:05       ` Phil Auld
2019-03-05 20:45         ` bsegall
2019-03-06 16:23           ` Phil Auld [this message]
2019-03-06 19:25             ` bsegall
2019-03-09 20:33               ` Phil Auld
2019-03-11 17:44                 ` bsegall
2019-03-11 20:25                   ` Phil Auld
2019-03-12 13:57                     ` Phil Auld
2019-03-13 17:44                       ` bsegall
2019-03-13 18:50                         ` Phil Auld
2019-03-13 20:26                           ` bsegall
2019-03-13 21:10                             ` Phil Auld
2019-03-12 17:29                     ` bsegall

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=20190306162313.GB8786@pauld.bos.csb \
    --to=pauld@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.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®