From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@atomlin.com>
To: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
vschneid@redhat.com
Cc: neelx@suse.com, sean@ashe.io, mproche@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] sched/fair: Feature to suppress Fair Server for NOHZ_FULL isolation
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2026 22:42:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260106034209.2703289-1-atomlin@atomlin.com> (raw)
Hi Ingo, Peter, Juri, Vincent,
This patch introduces a new scheduler feature, RT_SUPPRESS_FAIR_SERVER,
designed to ensure strict NOHZ_FULL isolation for SCHED_FIFO workloads,
particularly in the presence of resident CFS tasks.
In strictly partitioned, latency-critical environments (such as High
Frequency Trading platforms) administrators frequently employ fully
adaptive-tick CPUs to execute pinned SCHED_FIFO workloads. The fundamental
requirement is "zero OS noise"; specifically, the scheduler clock-tick must
remain suppressed ("offloaded"), given that standard SCHED_FIFO semantics
dictate no forced preemption between tasks of identical priority.
However, the extant "Fair Server" (Deadline Server) architecture
compromises this isolation guarantee. At present, should a background
SCHED_OTHER task be enqueued, the scheduler initiates the Fair Server
(dl_server_start). As the Fair Server functions as a SCHED_DEADLINE entity,
its activation increments rq->dl.dl_nr_running.
This condition compels sched_can_stop_tick() to return false, thereby
restarting the periodic tick to enforce the server's runtime.
To address this, the patch introduces a new scheduler feature control,
RT_SUPPRESS_FAIR_SERVER.
When engaged, this modification amends enqueue_task_fair() to forego the
invocation of dl_server_start() if, and only if, the following conditions
are met:
1. A Real-Time task (SCHED_FIFO/SCHED_RR) is currently in execution
2. RT bandwidth enforcement (rt_bandwidth_enabled()) is inactive
By precluding the server's initiation, rq->dl.dl_nr_running is maintained
at zero. This permits the tick logic to defer to the standard SCHED_FIFO
protocol, thereby ensuring the tick remains suppressed.
Considerations: This serves as a precision instrument for specialised
contexts. It explicitly prioritises determinism over fairness. Whilst
enabled, queued CFS tasks shall endure total starvation until such time as
the RT task voluntarily yields. I believe this is acceptable for
partitioned architectures where housekeeping duties are allocated to
alternative cores; however, I have guarded this capability within
CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL and a default-disabled feature flag to obviate the risk
of inadvertent starvation on general-purpose systems.
I welcome your thoughts on this approach.
Aaron Tomlin (1):
sched/fair: Introduce RT_SUPPRESS_FAIR_SERVER to optimise NOHZ_FULL
isolation
kernel/sched/fair.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
kernel/sched/features.h | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.51.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-01-06 3:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-06 3:42 Aaron Tomlin [this message]
2026-01-06 3:42 ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] sched/fair: Introduce RT_SUPPRESS_FAIR_SERVER to optimise " Aaron Tomlin
2026-01-06 9:07 ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] sched/fair: Feature to suppress Fair Server for " Shrikanth Hegde
2026-01-06 14:49 ` Aaron Tomlin
2026-01-07 9:48 ` Juri Lelli
2026-01-07 10:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-07 16:26 ` Aaron Tomlin
2026-01-13 1:43 ` Aaron Tomlin
2026-01-06 15:37 ` Valentin Schneider
2026-01-06 16:38 ` Daniel Vacek
2026-01-07 20:25 ` Aaron Tomlin
2026-01-09 9:21 ` Valentin Schneider
2026-01-13 19:15 ` Aaron Tomlin
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=20260106034209.2703289-1-atomlin@atomlin.com \
--to=atomlin@atomlin.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mproche@gmail.com \
--cc=neelx@suse.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sean@ashe.io \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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®