mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: luca abeni <luca.abeni@santannapisa.it>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>,
	Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/6] sched/dl: Try better placement even for deadline tasks that do not block
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 17:33:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aef12a88-a7c8-3cf6-1253-eca06d2d6555@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190711120041.GA3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 7/11/19 2:00 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 01:17:17PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 7/9/19 3:42 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
>>>>> That is, we only do those callbacks from:
>>>>>
>>>>>   schedule_tail()
>>>>>   __schedule()
>>>>>   rt_mutex_setprio()
>>>>>   __sched_setscheduler()
>>>>>
>>>>> and the above looks like it can happen outside of those.
> 
>> Is this what you are concerned about?
>>
>> (2 Cpus (CPU1, CPU2), 4 deadline task (thread0-X)) with 
>>
>> @@ -1137,6 +1137,13 @@ static inline void rq_pin_lock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
>>         rf->cookie = lockdep_pin_lock(&rq->lock);
>>  
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>> +       /*
>> +        * There should not be pending callbacks at the start of rq_lock();
>> +        * all sites that handle them flush them at the end.
>> +        */
>> +       WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->balance_callback);
>> +#endif
>>
>>
>> [   87.251237] *** <--- queue_balance_callback(migrate_dl_task) p=[thread0-3 3627] on CPU2
>> [   87.251261] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 3627 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1145 __schedule+0x56c/0x690
>> [   87.615882] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 3616 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1145 task_rq_lock+0xe8/0xf0
>> [   88.176844] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 3616 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1145 load_balance+0x4d0/0xbc0
>> [   88.381905] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 3616 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1145 load_balance+0x7d8/0xbc0
> 
> I'm not sure how we get 4 warns, I was thinking that as soon as we exit
> __schedule() we'd procress the callback so further warns would be
> avoided.

Reducing the warning to only fire on CPU1 I got another test-run:

[ 6688.373607] *** <--- queue_balance_callback(migrate_dl_task) p=[thread0-3 4343] on CPU1
[ 6688.381557] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4343 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1146 try_to_wake_up+0x614/0x788
...
[ 6688.505000]  try_to_wake_up+0x614/0x788
[ 6688.508794]  default_wake_function+0x34/0x48
[ 6688.513017]  autoremove_wake_function+0x3c/0x68
[ 6688.517497]  __wake_up_common+0x90/0x158
[ 6688.521374]  __wake_up_common_lock+0x88/0xd0
[ 6688.525595]  __wake_up+0x40/0x50
[ 6688.528787]  wake_up_klogd_work_func+0x4c/0x88
[ 6688.533184]  irq_work_run_list+0x8c/0xd8
[ 6688.537063]  irq_work_tick+0x48/0x60
[ 6688.540598]  update_process_times+0x44/0x60
[ 6688.544735]  tick_sched_handle.isra.5+0x44/0x68
[ 6688.549215]  tick_sched_timer+0x50/0xa0
[ 6688.553007]  __hrtimer_run_queues+0x11c/0x3d0
[ 6688.557316]  hrtimer_interrupt+0xd8/0x248
[ 6688.561282]  arch_timer_handler_phys+0x38/0x58
[ 6688.565678]  handle_percpu_devid_irq+0x90/0x2b8
[ 6688.570160]  generic_handle_irq+0x34/0x50
[ 6688.574124]  __handle_domain_irq+0x68/0xc0
[ 6688.578175]  gic_handle_irq+0x60/0xb0
...
[ 6688.589909] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4343 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1146 scheduler_tick+0xe8/0x128
...
[ 6688.714463]  scheduler_tick+0xe8/0x128
[ 6688.718170]  update_process_times+0x48/0x60
[ 6688.722306]  tick_sched_handle.isra.5+0x44/0x68
[ 6688.726786]  tick_sched_timer+0x50/0xa0
[ 6688.730579]  __hrtimer_run_queues+0x11c/0x3d0
[ 6688.734887]  hrtimer_interrupt+0xd8/0x248
[ 6688.738852]  arch_timer_handler_phys+0x38/0x58
[ 6688.743246]  handle_percpu_devid_irq+0x90/0x2b8
[ 6688.747727]  generic_handle_irq+0x34/0x50
[ 6688.751692]  __handle_domain_irq+0x68/0xc0
[ 6688.755741]  gic_handle_irq+0x60/0xb0
...
[ 6688.767476] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4343 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1146 task_rq_lock+0xc0/0x100
...
[ 6688.891511]  task_rq_lock+0xc0/0x100
[ 6688.895046]  dl_task_timer+0x48/0x2c8
[ 6688.898666]  __hrtimer_run_queues+0x11c/0x3d0
[ 6688.902975]  hrtimer_interrupt+0xd8/0x248
[ 6688.906939]  arch_timer_handler_phys+0x38/0x58
[ 6688.911334]  handle_percpu_devid_irq+0x90/0x2b8
[ 6688.915815]  generic_handle_irq+0x34/0x50
[ 6688.919779]  __handle_domain_irq+0x68/0xc0
[ 6688.923828]  gic_handle_irq+0x60/0xb0
...
[ 6688.944618] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4343 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1146 update_blocked_averages+0x84c/0x9a0
...
[ 6689.071664]  update_blocked_averages+0x84c/0x9a0
[ 6689.076231]  run_rebalance_domains+0x74/0xb0
[ 6689.080452]  __do_softirq+0x154/0x3f0
[ 6689.084074]  irq_exit+0xf0/0xf8
[ 6689.087178]  __handle_domain_irq+0x6c/0xc0
[ 6689.091228]  gic_handle_irq+0x60/0xb0
...
[ 6689.303143] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 4343 at kernel/sched/sched.h:1146 __schedule+0x478/0x698
...
[ 6689.440861]  __schedule+0x478/0x698
[ 6689.444310]  schedule+0x38/0xc0
[ 6689.447416]  do_notify_resume+0x88/0x380
[ 6689.451294]  work_pending+0x8/0x14
...
[ 6689.459256] *** ---> migrate_dl_task() p=[thread0-3 4343] to CPU-1

> 
>> [   88.586991] *** ---> migrate_dl_task() p=[thread0-3 3627] to CPU1
> 
> But yes, something like this. Basucally I want to avoid calling
> queue_balance_callback() from a context where we'll not follow up with
> balance_callback().

Understood.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-11 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-06  4:48 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Capacity awareness for SCHED_DEADLINE Luca Abeni
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] sched/dl: Improve deadline admission control for asymmetric CPU capacities Luca Abeni
2019-05-07 13:48   ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 13:55     ` Vincent Guittot
2019-05-07 14:02       ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 14:25     ` luca abeni
2019-05-07 14:31       ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 14:43         ` luca abeni
2019-07-08 11:22           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-07-08 15:05             ` Quentin Perret
2019-06-18 16:41   ` Alessio Balsini
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] sched/dl: Capacity-aware migrations Luca Abeni
2019-05-07 13:35   ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 14:17     ` luca abeni
2019-05-07 15:04       ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 14:10   ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 14:41     ` luca abeni
2019-05-07 15:02       ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-08  8:04   ` Juri Lelli
2019-05-08  8:17     ` luca abeni
2019-07-04 12:05   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-07-08  7:41     ` luca abeni
2019-07-08 10:41       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] sched/dl: Try better placement even for deadline tasks that do not block Luca Abeni
2019-05-07 14:13   ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-07 16:00     ` Morten Rasmussen
2019-05-08  8:01   ` Juri Lelli
2019-05-08  8:14     ` luca abeni
2019-05-08  9:22       ` Juri Lelli
2019-07-08 13:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09 13:24     ` luca abeni
2019-07-09 13:42       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-11 11:17         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-07-11 12:00           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-11 15:33             ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2019-07-09 14:44       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] sched/dl: Improve capacity-aware wakeup Luca Abeni
2019-05-08  9:08   ` Juri Lelli
2019-05-08  9:24     ` luca abeni
2019-05-08 12:05       ` Juri Lelli
2019-05-08 12:47         ` luca abeni
2019-05-08 13:10           ` Juri Lelli
2019-05-08 14:12             ` luca abeni
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] sched/dl: If the task does not fit anywhere, select the fastest core Luca Abeni
2019-05-06  4:48 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] sched/dl: Try not to select a too fast core Luca Abeni
2019-05-07 15:57   ` Quentin Perret
2019-05-08  6:26     ` luca abeni
2019-05-09 13:46       ` Quentin Perret

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=aef12a88-a7c8-3cf6-1253-eca06d2d6555@arm.com \
    --to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --cc=luca.abeni@santannapisa.it \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=patrick.bellasi@arm.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=quentin.perret@arm.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=tommaso.cucinotta@santannapisa.it \
    --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®