mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>, <mingo@redhat.com>,
	<peterz@infradead.org>, <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	<vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<yury.norov@gmail.com>, <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: <vschneid@redhat.com>, <iii@linux.ibm.com>,
	<huschle@linux.ibm.com>, <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	<dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>,
	<jgross@suse.com>, <pbonzini@redhat.com>, <seanjc@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 07/10] sched/core: Push current task from paravirt CPU
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 11:10:22 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7227822a-0b4a-47cc-af7f-190f6d3b3e07@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250910174210.1969750-8-sshegde@linux.ibm.com>

Hello Shrikanth,

On 9/10/2025 11:12 PM, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> Actively push out any task running on a paravirt CPU. Since the task is
> running on the CPU need to spawn a stopper thread and push the task out.
> 
> If task is sleeping, when it wakes up it is expected to move out. In
> case it still chooses a paravirt CPU, next tick will move it out.
> However, if the task in pinned only to paravirt CPUs, it will continue
> running there.
> 
> Though code is almost same as __balance_push_cpu_stop and quite close to
> push_cpu_stop, it provides a cleaner implementation w.r.t to PARAVIRT
> config.
> 
> Add push_task_work_done flag to protect pv_push_task_work buffer. This has
> been placed at the empty slot available considering 64/128 byte
> cacheline.
> 
> This currently works only FAIR and RT.

EXT can perhaps use the ops->cpu_{release,acquire}() if they are
interested in this.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c  | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  kernel/sched/sched.h |  9 ++++-
>  2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 279b0dd72b5e..1f9df5b8a3a2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -5629,6 +5629,10 @@ void sched_tick(void)
>  
>  	sched_clock_tick();
>  
> +	/* push the current task out if a paravirt CPU */
> +	if (is_cpu_paravirt(cpu))
> +		push_current_from_paravirt_cpu(rq);

Does this mean paravirt CPU is capable of handling an interrupt but may
not be continuously available to run a task? Or is the VMM expected to set
the CPU on the paravirt mask and give the vCPU sufficient time to move the
task before yanking it away from the pCPU?

> +
>  	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
>  	donor = rq->donor;
>  
> @@ -10977,4 +10981,84 @@ void sched_enq_and_set_task(struct sched_enq_and_set_ctx *ctx)
>  struct cpumask __cpu_paravirt_mask __read_mostly;
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__cpu_paravirt_mask);
>  DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(cpu_paravirt_push_tasks);
> +
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_stop_work, pv_push_task_work);
> +
> +static int paravirt_push_cpu_stop(void *arg)
> +{
> +	struct task_struct *p = arg;

Can we move all pushable tasks at once instead of just the rq->curr at
the time of the tick? It can also avoid keeping the reference to "p"
and only selectively pushing it. Thoughts?

> +	struct rq *rq = this_rq();
> +	struct rq_flags rf;
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
> +	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
> +	rq->push_task_work_done = 0;
> +
> +	update_rq_clock(rq);
> +
> +	if (task_rq(p) == rq && task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
> +		cpu = select_fallback_rq(rq->cpu, p);
> +		rq = __migrate_task(rq, &rf, p, cpu);
> +	}
> +
> +	rq_unlock(rq, &rf);
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
> +	put_task_struct(p);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* A CPU is marked as Paravirt when there is contention for underlying
> + * physical CPU and using this CPU will lead to hypervisor preemptions.
> + * It is better not to use this CPU.
> + *
> + * In case any task is scheduled on such CPU, move it out. In
> + * select_fallback_rq a non paravirt CPU will be chosen and henceforth
> + * task shouldn't come back to this CPU
> + */
> +void push_current_from_paravirt_cpu(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +	struct task_struct *push_task = rq->curr;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct rq_flags rf;
> +
> +	if (!is_cpu_paravirt(rq->cpu))
> +		return;
> +
> +	/* Idle task can't be pused out */
> +	if (rq->curr == rq->idle)
> +		return;
> +
> +	/* Do for only SCHED_NORMAL AND RT for now */
> +	if (push_task->sched_class != &fair_sched_class &&
> +	    push_task->sched_class != &rt_sched_class)
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (kthread_is_per_cpu(push_task) ||
> +	    is_migration_disabled(push_task))
> +		return;
> +
> +	/* Is it affine to only paravirt cpus? */
> +	if (cpumask_subset(push_task->cpus_ptr, cpu_paravirt_mask))
> +		return;
> +
> +	/* There is already a stopper thread for this. Dont race with it */
> +	if (rq->push_task_work_done == 1)
> +		return;
> +
> +	local_irq_save(flags);
> +	preempt_disable();

Disabling IRQs implies preemption is disabled.

> +
> +	get_task_struct(push_task);
> +
> +	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
> +	rq->push_task_work_done = 1;
> +	rq_unlock(rq, &rf);
> +
> +	stop_one_cpu_nowait(rq->cpu, paravirt_push_cpu_stop, push_task,
> +			    this_cpu_ptr(&pv_push_task_work));
> +	preempt_enable();
> +	local_irq_restore(flags);
> +}
>  #endif
-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek


  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-11  5:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-10 17:42 [RFC PATCH v3 00/10] paravirt CPUs and push task for less vCPU preemption Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/10] sched/docs: Document cpu_paravirt_mask and Paravirt CPU concept Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/10] cpumask: Introduce cpu_paravirt_mask Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/10] sched: Static key to check paravirt cpu push Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11  1:53   ` Yury Norov
2025-09-11 14:37     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11 15:29       ` Yury Norov
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/10] sched/core: Dont allow to use CPU marked as paravirt Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11  5:16   ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-09-11 14:44     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/10] sched/fair: Don't consider paravirt CPUs for wakeup and load balance Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11  5:23   ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-09-11 15:56     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11 16:55       ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-11-08 12:04     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/10] sched/rt: Don't select paravirt CPU for wakeup and push/pull rt task Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/10] sched/core: Push current task from paravirt CPU Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11  5:40   ` K Prateek Nayak [this message]
2025-09-11 16:52     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-11 17:06       ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-09-12  5:22         ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-12  8:48           ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-09-12 12:49             ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-11-10  4:54     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/10] sysfs: Add paravirt CPU file Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/10] powerpc: Add debug file for set/unset paravirt CPUs Shrikanth Hegde
2025-09-10 17:42 ` [HELPER PATCH] sysfs: Provide write method for paravirt Shrikanth Hegde
2025-10-20 14:32 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/10] paravirt CPUs and push task for less vCPU preemption Sean Christopherson
2025-10-20 15:05   ` Paolo Bonzini
2025-10-23  4:03     ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-10-21  6:10   ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-10-22 18:46     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-10-30 17:43       ` 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=7227822a-0b4a-47cc-af7f-190f6d3b3e07@amd.com \
    --to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=huschle@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=vineeth@bitbyteword.org \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=yury.norov@gmail.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®