From: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@codethink.co.uk>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Subject: Re: SCHED_DEADLINE tasks missing their deadline with SCHED_FLAG_RECLAIM jobs in the mix (using GRUB)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 12:24:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <880890e699117e02d984ba2bb391c63be5fd71e8.camel@codethink.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFFdseGAqImLtVCH@jlelli-thinkpadt14gen4.remote.csb>
Hi Juri
On Tue, 2025-06-17 at 14:21 +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
> On 02/06/25 16:59, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> > Hi Juri
> >
> > On Thu, 2025-05-29 at 11:39 +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > It should help us to better understand your setup and possibly reproduce
> > > the problem you are seeing.
>
> OK, it definitely took a while (apologies), but I think I managed to
> reproduce the issue you are seeing.
No need to apologies, I know how hard it can be trying to bring up random stuff in the Linux world : )
> I added SCHED_FLAG_RECLAIM support to rt-app [1], so it's easier for me
> to play with the taskset and got to the following two situations when
> running your coreX taskset on CPU1 of my system (since the issue is
> already reproducible, I think it's OK to ignore the other tasksets as
> they are running isolated on different CPUs anyway).
>
> This is your coreX taskset, in which the last task is the bad behaving one that
> will run without/with RECLAIM in the test.
>
> > sched_deadline = sched_period | sched_runtime | CP max run time 90% of sched_runtime | utilisation |
> > reclaim |
> > -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
> > 5 ms | 0.15 ms | 0.135 ms | 3.00% | no |
> > 10 ms | 1.8 ms | 1.62 ms | 18.00% | no |
> > 10 ms | 2.1 ms | 1.89 ms | 21.00% | no |
> > 14 ms | 2.3 ms | 2.07 ms | 16.43% | no |
> > 50 ms | 8.0 ms | 7.20 ms | 16:00% | no |
> > 10 ms | 0.5 ms | **1 | 5.00% | no |
>
> Without reclaim everything looks good (apart from the 1st tasks that I
> think suffers a bit from the granularity/precision of rt-app runtime
> loop):
>
> https://github.com/jlelli/misc/blob/main/deadline-no-reclaim.png
Yeah, granularity/precision is definitely a concern. We initially even started off with 1 ms sched_deadline =
sched_period for task 1 but neither of our test systems (amd64-based Intel NUCs and aarch64-based RADXA
ROCK5Bs) was able to handle that very well. So we opted to increase it to 5 ms which is still rather stressful.
> Order is the same as above, last tasks gets constantly throttled and
> makes no harm to the rest.
>
> With reclaim (only last misbehaving task) we indeed seem to have a problem:
>
> https://github.com/jlelli/misc/blob/main/deadline-reclaim.png
>
> Essentially all other tasks are experiencing long wakeup delays that
> cause deadline misses. The bad behaving task seems to be able to almost
> monopolize the CPU. Interesting to notice that, even if I left max
> available bandwidth to 95%, the CPU is busy at 100%.
Yeah, pretty much completely overloaded.
> So, yeah, Luca, I think we have a problem. :-)
>
> Will try to find more time soon and keep looking into this.
Thank you very much and just let me know if I can help in any way.
> Thanks,
> Juri
>
> 1 - https://github.com/jlelli/rt-app/tree/reclaim
BTW: I will be talking at the OSS NA/ELC next week in Denver should any of you folks be around.
Cheers
Marcel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-18 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-28 18:04 Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-02 13:55 ` Juri Lelli
2025-05-02 14:10 ` luca abeni
2025-05-03 13:14 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-05 15:53 ` luca abeni
2025-05-03 11:14 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-07 20:25 ` luca abeni
2025-05-19 13:32 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-20 16:09 ` luca abeni
2025-05-21 9:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-23 19:46 ` luca abeni
2025-05-25 19:29 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-05-29 9:39 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-02 14:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-17 12:21 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-18 11:24 ` Marcel Ziswiler [this message]
2025-06-20 9:29 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 9:37 ` luca abeni
2025-06-20 9:58 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 14:16 ` luca abeni
2025-06-20 15:28 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-20 16:52 ` luca abeni
2025-06-24 7:49 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-24 12:59 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-24 15:00 ` luca abeni
2025-06-25 9:30 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 10:11 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 12:50 ` luca abeni
2025-06-26 10:59 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-26 11:45 ` Juri Lelli
2025-06-25 15:55 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-24 13:36 ` luca abeni
2025-05-30 9:21 ` luca abeni
2025-06-03 11:18 ` Marcel Ziswiler
2025-06-06 13:16 ` luca abeni
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=880890e699117e02d984ba2bb391c63be5fd71e8.camel@codethink.co.uk \
--to=marcel.ziswiler@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vineeth@bitbyteword.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®