From: Aaron Lu <ziqianlu@bytedance.com>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/7] sched/fair: Handle unthrottle path for task based throttle
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 18:43:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250314104315.GE1633113@bytedance> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3fdb7163-d1f0-45c8-89fa-7c904b567696@amd.com>
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 09:23:47AM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello Aaron,
>
> On 3/13/2025 12:51 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
>
> [..snip..]
>
> > ---
> > kernel/sched/fair.c | 132 +++++++++++++++-----------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 87 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index ab403ff7d53c8..4a95fe3785e43 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -5366,18 +5366,17 @@ enqueue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct
> > sched_entity *se, int flags)
> >
> > if (cfs_rq->nr_queued == 1) {
> > check_enqueue_throttle(cfs_rq);
> > - if (!throttled_hierarchy(cfs_rq)) {
> > - list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> > - } else {
> > + list_add_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> > #ifdef CONFIG_CFS_BANDWIDTH
> > + if (throttled_hierarchy(cfs_rq)) {
> > struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
> >
> > if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq) && !cfs_rq->throttled_clock)
> > cfs_rq->throttled_clock = rq_clock(rq);
> > if (!cfs_rq->throttled_clock_self)
> > cfs_rq->throttled_clock_self = rq_clock(rq);
>
> These bits probabaly need revisiting. From what I understand, these
> stats were maintained to know when a task was woken up on a
> throttled hierarchy which was not connected to the parent essentially
> tracking the amount of time runnable tasks were waiting on the
> cfs_rq before an unthrottle event allowed them to be picked.
Do you mean these throttled_clock stats?
I think they are here because we do not record the throttled_clock for
empty cfs_rqs and once the cfs_rq has task enqueued, it needs to record
its throttled_clock. This is done in commit 79462e8c879a("sched: don't
account throttle time for empty groups") by Josh. I don't think per-task
throttle change this.
With this said, I think there is a gap in per-task throttle, i.e. when
all tasks are dequeued from this throttled cfs_rq, we should record its
throttled_time and clear its throttled_clock.
>
> With per-task throttle, these semantics no longer apply since a woken
> task will run and dequeue itself when exiting to userspace.
>
> Josh do you have any thoughts on this?
>
> > -#endif
> > }
> > +#endif
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -5947,12 +5967,16 @@ static int tg_throttle_down(struct task_group
> > *tg, void *data)
> >
> > /* group is entering throttled state, stop time */
> > cfs_rq->throttled_clock_pelt = rq_clock_pelt(rq);
> > - list_del_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> >
> > SCHED_WARN_ON(cfs_rq->throttled_clock_self);
> > if (cfs_rq->nr_queued)
> > cfs_rq->throttled_clock_self = rq_clock(rq);
> >
> > + if (!cfs_rq->nr_queued) {
> > + list_del_leaf_cfs_rq(cfs_rq);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
>
> This bit can perhaps go in Patch 2?
I kept all the changes to leaf cfs_rq handling in one patch, I think it
is easier to review :-)
Thanks,
Aaron
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&cfs_rq->throttled_limbo_list));
> > /*
> > * rq_lock is held, current is (obviously) executing this in kernelspace.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-14 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-17 10:56 [RFC PATCH 0/7] Defer throttle when task exits to user Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 7:21 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] sched/fair: Add related data structure for task based throttle Aaron Lu
2025-03-17 10:28 ` Valentin Schneider
2025-03-17 11:02 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 7:21 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] sched/fair: Handle throttle path " Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 18:14 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 8:48 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 9:00 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 3:28 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 8:57 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 9:12 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 15:10 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 8:39 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-14 8:49 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 9:42 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 10:26 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 11:47 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 15:58 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-14 18:04 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 11:07 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-31 6:42 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-31 9:14 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-16 3:25 ` Josh Don
2025-03-17 2:54 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-20 6:59 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-20 8:39 ` Chengming Zhou
2025-03-20 18:40 ` Xi Wang
2025-03-24 8:58 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-25 10:02 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-28 0:11 ` Xi Wang
2025-03-28 3:11 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-28 22:47 ` Benjamin Segall
2025-03-19 13:43 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-20 1:06 ` Josh Don
2025-03-20 6:53 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-13 7:21 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] sched/fair: Handle unthrottle " Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 3:53 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 4:06 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 10:43 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2025-03-14 17:52 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-17 5:48 ` Aaron Lu
2025-04-02 9:25 ` Aaron Lu
2025-04-02 17:24 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-13 7:21 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] sched/fair: Take care of migrated task " Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 4:03 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 9:49 ` [External] " Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 7:21 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] sched/fair: Take care of group/affinity/sched_class change for throttled task Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 4:51 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 11:40 ` [External] " Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 7:22 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] sched/fair: fix tasks_rcu with task based throttle Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 4:14 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 11:37 ` [External] " Aaron Lu
2025-03-31 6:19 ` Aaron Lu
2025-04-01 3:17 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-04-01 8:48 ` Aaron Lu
2025-03-13 7:22 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] sched/fair: Make sure cfs_rq has enough runtime_remaining on unthrottle path Aaron Lu
2025-03-14 4:18 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-03-14 11:39 ` [External] " Aaron Lu
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=20250314104315.GE1633113@bytedance \
--to=ziqianlu@bytedance.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=zhouchuyi@bytedance.com \
/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®