From: Kayra Cizmeci <kayracizmeci@gmail.com>
To: Li kunyu <likunyu@open-hieco.net>
Cc: 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, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Distribute burst-woken tasks when rq depth reaches 3x average
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 21:10:19 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <autCBv3-foLXkZss@scheduler.schedules> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261104091842.266273-1-likunyu@open-hieco.net>
Hi!
On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 05:18:42PM +0800, Li kunyu wrote:
FWIW, This doesn't apply to the mainline:
Patch failed at 0001 sched/fair: Distribute burst-woken tasks when rq depth reaches 3x average
error: patch failed: kernel/sched/fair.c:9972
error: kernel/sched/fair.c: patch does not apply
> When a task burst-wakes a large number of tasks in a short period, tasks
> can pile up on a single CPU regardless of whether the system has idle
> CPUs or NO_HZ enabled.
>
> Track the average runqueue depth (scaled by SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE to
> preserve fractional precision) in root_domain during the periodic
> load-balance pass.
>
> In select_task_rq_fair(), when the target runqueue depth reaches 3x the
> system-wide average, fall back to cpumask_any_and_distribute(p->cpus_ptr,
> cpu_active_mask) to rotate waking tasks across allowed CPUs and reset the
> periodic load balance intervals so regular load balancing can promptly
> smooth out the distribution.
>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20261021125419.GK2823843@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/
> Signed-off-by: Li kunyu <likunyu@open-hieco.net>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 3 ++
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 6e005f1e8dc9..e4d278ac46c4 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -9903,6 +9903,38 @@ static int find_energy_efficient_cpu(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu)
> return target;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Check if a CPU's rq depth reaches 3x the system-wide average tracked
> + * in root_domain (scaled by SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE, floored at 1 task).
> + */
> +static inline bool rq_burst_overloaded(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> + unsigned long avg;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!rq->rd))
> + return false;
> +
> + avg = max_t(unsigned long, READ_ONCE(rq->rd->avg_nr_running),
> + SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);
> +
> + return (READ_ONCE(rq->nr_running) << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) >= avg * 3;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void reset_periodic_lb_interval(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct sched_domain *sd;
> +
> + /*
> + * Only the most basic values are updated here to avoid excessive
> + * cost.
> + */
> + for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> + if (READ_ONCE(sd->balance_interval) > sd->min_interval)
> + WRITE_ONCE(sd->balance_interval, sd->min_interval);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /*
> * select_task_rq_fair: Select target runqueue for the waking task in domains
> * that have the relevant SD flag set. In practice, this is SD_BALANCE_WAKE,
> @@ -9972,11 +10004,19 @@ select_task_rq_fair(struct task_struct *p, int prev_cpu, int wake_flags)
>
> /* Slow path */
> if (unlikely(sd))
> - return sched_balance_find_dst_cpu(sd, p, cpu, prev_cpu, sd_flag);
> -
> + new_cpu = sched_balance_find_dst_cpu(sd, p, cpu, prev_cpu, sd_flag);
> /* Fast path */
> - if (wake_flags & WF_TTWU)
> - return select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu, new_cpu);
> + else if (wake_flags & WF_TTWU)
> + new_cpu = select_idle_sibling(p, prev_cpu, new_cpu);
> +
> + if (unlikely(rq_burst_overloaded(new_cpu))) {
> + int dist_cpu = cpumask_any_and_distribute(p->cpus_ptr, cpu_active_mask);
> +
> + if (likely(dist_cpu < nr_cpumask_bits)) {
> + reset_periodic_lb_interval(new_cpu);
Why are we calling this for new_cpu?
> + return dist_cpu;
> + }
> + }
>
> return new_cpu;
> }
> @@ -11685,6 +11725,7 @@ struct sg_lb_stats {
> struct sd_lb_stats {
> struct sched_group *busiest; /* Busiest group in this sd */
> struct sched_group *local; /* Local group in this sd */
> + unsigned long total_nr_running; /* Sum of nr_running in this sd */
> unsigned long total_load; /* Total load of all groups in sd */
> unsigned long total_capacity; /* Total capacity of all groups in sd */
> unsigned long avg_load; /* Average load across all groups in sd */
> @@ -12964,6 +13005,7 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sd
> /* Now, start updating sd_lb_stats */
> sds->total_load += sgs->group_load;
> sds->total_capacity += sgs->group_capacity;
> + sds->total_nr_running += sgs->sum_nr_running;
>
> sum_util += sgs->group_util;
> sg = sg->next;
> @@ -12982,11 +13024,31 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sd
> env->fbq_type = fbq_classify_group(&sds->busiest_stat);
>
> if (!env->sd->parent) {
> + unsigned int weight = env->sd->span_weight;
Uh-oh. There's something wrong, no?
span_weight equals all of the CPU's in the domain.
So in sched_balance_rq() we call sched_balance_find_src_group() and that
calls update_sd_lb_stats().
But it just retries balancing when all of the tasks
in the rq is pinned. In that case the CPU is cleared from the env->cpus
bitmap. But sum_nr_running is calculated for all env->cpus while
span_weight is for all of the CPU's in that domain.
BTW, in theory this could happen multiple times in a row and
it could make things even worse.
Or am I missing something?
> +
> /* update overload indicator if we are at root domain */
> set_rd_overloaded(env->dst_rq->rd, sg_overloaded);
>
> /* Update over-utilization (tipping point, U >= 0) indicator */
> set_rd_overutilized(env->dst_rq->rd, sg_overutilized);
> +
> + /*
> + * We update the average task count at the top-level (root)
> + * domain, as this incurs the least overhead and comes
> + * closest to the ideal scenario. The trade-off is that we
> + * must accept some temporary data inaccuracy.
> + */
> + if (weight) {
> + unsigned long cur_avg;
> + unsigned long old_avg;
> +
> + cur_avg = (sds->total_nr_running << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) / weight;
> + old_avg = READ_ONCE(env->dst_rq->rd->avg_nr_running);
> + if (old_avg)
> + cur_avg = (old_avg * 7 + cur_avg) >> 3;
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(env->dst_rq->rd->avg_nr_running, cur_avg);
> + }
> } else if (sg_overutilized) {
> set_rd_overutilized(env->dst_rq->rd, sg_overutilized);
> }
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> index e656c7059bf8..4147e043407c 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -1077,6 +1077,9 @@ struct root_domain {
> cpumask_var_t rto_mask;
> struct cpupri cpupri;
>
> + /* Scaled (SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE) average per-CPU rq depth */
> + unsigned long avg_nr_running;
> +
> /*
> * NULL-terminated list of performance domains intersecting with the
> * CPUs of the rd. Protected by RCU.
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index 3dab0253976f..41c3b9e30d65 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -558,6 +558,8 @@ static int init_rootdomain(struct root_domain *rd)
>
> if (cpupri_init(&rd->cpupri) != 0)
> goto free_cpudl;
> +
> + rd->avg_nr_running = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
> return 0;
>
> free_cpudl:
> --
> 2.47.3
>
BTW, if we are looking to nr_running for this how about atleast looking
at our dist_cpu and not returning it if its nr_running is bigger
than the other CPU. Right now we are looking only at the average.
Would this work for you? Peter/Li?
Thanks,
Kayra
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-04 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-04 9:18 Li kunyu
2026-11-04 9:34 ` Li kunyu
2026-11-04 18:10 ` Kayra Cizmeci [this message]
2026-11-05 1:43 ` Li kunyu
2026-11-05 3:44 ` K Prateek Nayak
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=autCBv3-foLXkZss@scheduler.schedules \
--to=kayracizmeci@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=likunyu@open-hieco.net \
--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 \
--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®