From: 王贇 <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"open list:SCHEDULER" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: avoid scale real weight down to zero
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:23:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <234bfc8a-c60d-c375-f681-e4230d8c5a20@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <38e8e212-59a1-64b2-b247-b6d0b52d8dc1@linux.alibaba.com>
Hi Peter, Vincent
My apologies to missing the case when CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
is disabled, I've replaced the MIN_SHARE with 2UL as it was
defined, sorry for the trouble...
Regards,
Michael Wang
On 2020/3/18 上午10:15, 王贇 wrote:
> During our testing, we found a case that shares no longer
> working correctly, the cgroup topology is like:
>
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/A (shares=102400)
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/A/B (shares=2)
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/A/B/C (shares=1024)
>
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/D (shares=1024)
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/D/E (shares=1024)
> /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/D/E/F (shares=1024)
>
> The same benchmark is running in group C & F, no other tasks are
> running, the benchmark is capable to consumed all the CPUs.
>
> We suppose the group C will win more CPU resources since it could
> enjoy all the shares of group A, but it's F who wins much more.
>
> The reason is because we have group B with shares as 2, since
> A->cfs_rq.load.weight == B->se.load.weight == B->shares/nr_cpus,
> so A->cfs_rq.load.weight become very small.
>
> And in calc_group_shares() we calculate shares as:
>
> load = max(scale_load_down(cfs_rq->load.weight), cfs_rq->avg.load_avg);
> shares = (tg_shares * load) / tg_weight;
>
> Since the 'cfs_rq->load.weight' is too small, the load become 0
> after scale down, although 'tg_shares' is 102400, shares of the se
> which stand for group A on root cfs_rq become 2.
>
> While the se of D on root cfs_rq is far more bigger than 2, so it
> wins the battle.
>
> Thus when scale_load_down() scale real weight down to 0, it's no
> longer telling the real story, the caller will have the wrong
> information and the calculation will be buggy.
>
> This patch add check in scale_load_down(), so the real weight will
> be >= MIN_SHARES after scale, after applied the group C wins as
> expected.
>
> Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * replace MIN_SHARE with 2UL to cover CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED=n case
>
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> index 2a0caf394dd4..9bca26bd60d9 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -118,7 +118,13 @@ extern long calc_load_fold_active(struct rq *this_rq, long adjust);
> #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> # define NICE_0_LOAD_SHIFT (SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT + SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT)
> # define scale_load(w) ((w) << SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT)
> -# define scale_load_down(w) ((w) >> SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT)
> +# define scale_load_down(w) \
> +({ \
> + unsigned long __w = (w); \
> + if (__w) \
> + __w = max(2UL, __w >> SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT); \
> + __w; \
> +})
> #else
> # define NICE_0_LOAD_SHIFT (SCHED_FIXEDPOINT_SHIFT)
> # define scale_load(w) (w)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-18 2:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-18 2:15 王贇
2020-03-18 2:23 ` 王贇 [this message]
2020-03-18 11:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-20 12:58 ` [tip: sched/core] sched: Avoid " tip-bot2 for Michael Wang
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=234bfc8a-c60d-c375-f681-e4230d8c5a20@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=yun.wang@linux.alibaba.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=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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®