From: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/9] sched/docs: Document avoid_cpu_mask and avoid CPU concept
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 06:02:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250628220230.2052-1-hdanton@sina.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <90456362-ad16-4fa8-bba5-ec40aba88aa4@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:07:22 +0530 Shrikanth Hegde wrote
> On 6/27/25 05:57, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 20:16:36 +0530 Shrikanth Hegde wrote
> >>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 00:41:00 +0530 Shrikanth Hegde wrote
> >>>> This describes what avoid CPU means and what scheduler aims to do
> >>>> when a CPU is marked as avoid.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.rst | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.rst b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.rst
> >>>> index ed07efea7d02..d32755298fca 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.rst
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-arch.rst
> >>>> @@ -62,6 +62,31 @@ Your cpu_idle routines need to obey the following rules:
> >>>> arch/x86/kernel/process.c has examples of both polling and
> >>>> sleeping idle functions.
> >>>>
> >>>> +CPU Avoid
> >>>> +=========
> >>>> +
> >>>> +Under paravirt conditions it is possible to overcommit CPU resources.
> >>>> +i.e sum of virtual CPU(vCPU) of all VM is greater than number of physical
> >>>> +CPUs(pCPU). Under such conditions when all or many VM have high utilization,
> >>>> +hypervisor won't be able to satisfy the requirement and has to context switch
> >>>> +within or across VM. VM level context switch is more expensive compared to
> >>>> +task context switch within the VM.
> >>>> +
> >>> Sounds like VMs not well configured (or pCPUs not well partationed).
> >>
> >> No. That's how VMs under paravirtulized case configured as i understand.
> >> Correct me if i am wrong.
> >>
> >> On powerpc, we have Shared Processor Logical partitions (SPLPAR) which allows overcommit.
> >> When other LPAR(VM) are idle, by having overcommit one could get more work done. This allows one
> >> to configure more VMs too. The said issue happens only when every/most VMs ask for
> >> CPU at the same time.
> >>
> > After putting virtualization aside, lets see a simpler case where more
> > than 1024 apps are bound to a single (ppc having 4 CPUs for instance) CPU,
> > what can we do wrt app responsibility in kernel?
>
> In this case you will not likely have vCPU preemption. you will have
> task preemption. That is ok. Patch doesn't aim to solve the case you
> have mentioned above.
>
It is a case of overcommit due to mis-config where scheduler does not
help simply because kernel is not the pill that kills all pains.
> In the generic SPLPAR configuration virtual processor usually have large
> number of vCPUs and powerpc systems are fairly large in terms of CPU as
> well.
>
Overcommit is not SPLPAR specific, nor PPC, because it is buggy for scheduler
to create overcommit on either PPC or Arm64.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-28 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-25 19:10 [RFC v2 0/9] cpu avoid state and push task mechanism Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 1/9] sched/docs: Document avoid_cpu_mask and avoid CPU concept Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-26 6:27 ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-26 14:46 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-27 0:27 ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-27 4:37 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-28 22:02 ` Hillf Danton [this message]
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 2/9] cpumask: Introduce cpu_avoid_mask Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 3/9] sched/core: Dont allow to use CPU marked as avoid Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 4/9] sched/fair: Don't use CPU marked as avoid for wakeup and load balance Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-26 0:02 ` Yury Norov
2025-06-26 13:42 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 5/9] sched/rt: Don't select CPU marked as avoid for wakeup and push/pull rt task Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 6/9] sched/core: Push current task out if CPU is marked as avoid Shrikanth Hegde
2025-08-12 18:40 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 7/9] sched: Add static key check for cpu_avoid Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-26 0:12 ` Yury Norov
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 8/9] sysfs: Add cpu_avoid file Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-01 9:35 ` Greg KH
2025-07-02 6:05 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 19:11 ` [RFC v2 9/9] [DEBUG] powerpc: add debug file for set/unset cpu avoid Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 22:53 ` Yury Norov
2025-06-26 13:39 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-06-25 21:55 ` [RFC v2 0/9] cpu avoid state and push task mechanism Yury Norov
2025-06-26 14:33 ` Shrikanth Hegde
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=20250628220230.2052-1-hdanton@sina.com \
--to=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.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®