mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@arm.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
	Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] sched/uclamp: Track uclamped util_avg in sched_avg
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2023 16:05:29 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cda9bff0-1fcb-4736-93e7-19659cac9a01@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d1b613d5-2207-45dd-8aa2-a276502ccaa1@arm.com>

On 31/10/2023 15:52, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 04/10/2023 11:04, Hongyan Xia wrote:
>> From: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@arm.com>
> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -6445,6 +6450,21 @@ static int sched_idle_cpu(int cpu)
>>   }
>>   #endif
>>   
>> +void ___update_util_avg_uclamp(struct sched_avg *avg, struct sched_entity *se);
> 
> IMHO, `struct sched_avg *avg` can only be the one of a cfs_rq. So
> passing a cfs_rq would eliminate the question whether this can be from
> another se.

At the moment, yes, the avg can only come from cfs_rq. The reason why I 
kept sched_avg is that once we have sum aggregation for RT tasks, it's 
very likely we will end up calling this function on rt_rq->avg, so 
having just sched_avg here will work for RT in the future.

>> +static void update_se_chain(struct task_struct *p)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK
>> +	struct sched_entity *se = &p->se;
>> +	struct rq *rq = task_rq(p);
>> +
>> +	for_each_sched_entity(se) {
>> +		struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
>> +
>> +		___update_util_avg_uclamp(&cfs_rq->avg, se);
>> +	}
>> +#endif
>> +}
>>   /*
>>    * The enqueue_task method is called before nr_running is
>>    * increased. Here we update the fair scheduling stats and
>> @@ -6511,6 +6531,16 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>>   			goto enqueue_throttle;
>>   	}
>>   
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Re-evaluate the se hierarchy now that on_rq is true. This is
>> +	 * important to enforce uclamp the moment a task with uclamp is
>> +	 * enqueued, rather than waiting a timer tick for uclamp to kick in.
>> +	 *
>> +	 * XXX: This duplicates some of the work already done in the above for
>> +	 * loops.
>> +	 */
>> +	update_se_chain(p);
> 
> I try to figure out why this is necessary here:
> 
> enqueue_task_fair()
>    for_each_sched_entity()
>      enqueue_entity()
>        update_load_avg()
>          __update_load_avg_se()
>            ___update_util_avg_uclamp()        <-- if se->on_rq,
>                                                   update p (se) if we
>                                                   cross PELT period (1)
>                                                   boundaries
>            ___decay_util_avg_uclamp_towards() <-- decay p (se)      (2)
> 
>        enqueue_util_avg_uclamp()          <-- enqueue p into cfs_rq (3)
> 
>        se->on_rq = 1                          <-- set p (se) on_rq  (4)
> 
>    for_each_sched_entity()
>      update_load_avg()                        <-- update all on_rq se's
>                                                   in the hierarchy  (5)
> 
>    update_se_chain()                          <-- update p (se) and its
>                                                   se hierarchy      (6)
> 
> (1) Skip p since it is !se->on_rq.
> 
> (2) Decay p->se->avg.util_avg_uclamp to 0 since it was sleeping.
> 
> (3) Attach p to its cfs_rq
> 
> ...
> 
> (6) Update all all se's and cfs_rq's involved in p's task_group
>      hierarchy (including propagation from se (level=x+1) to cfs_rq
>      (level=x))
> 
> Question for me is why can't you integrate the util_avg_uclamp signals
> for se's and cfs_rq's/rq's much closer into existing PELT functions?

So the problem is that when we enqueue the task (say UCLAMP_MIN of 200), 
at that exact moment se->on_rq is false, so we only decay and not 
enforce UCLAMP_MIN. Further up in the hierarchy we do update_load_avg(), 
but the se of the task has already been processed so UCLAMP_MIN has not 
taken any effect. To make sure UCLAMP_MIN is immediately effective, I 
just re-evaluate the whole hierarchy from bottom to top.

I probably didn't quite catch what you said here. Could you elaborate a 
bit on what 'much closer' means?

Hongyan

  reply	other threads:[~2023-11-09 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-04  9:04 [RFC PATCH 0/6] sched: uclamp sum aggregation Hongyan Xia
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] sched/uclamp: Track uclamped util_avg in sched_avg Hongyan Xia
2023-10-31 15:52   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-11-09 16:05     ` Hongyan Xia [this message]
2023-11-14 12:59       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-12-04 16:07   ` Vincent Guittot
2023-12-05 14:24     ` Hongyan Xia
2023-12-05 16:22       ` Vincent Guittot
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] sched/uclamp: Simulate PELT decay in util_avg_uclamp Hongyan Xia
2023-11-01 16:06   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-11-09 16:50     ` Hongyan Xia
2023-12-04 16:07   ` Vincent Guittot
2023-12-05 14:47     ` Hongyan Xia
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] sched/fair: Use CFS util_avg_uclamp for utilization and frequency Hongyan Xia
2023-11-01 22:34   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] sched/fair: Rewrite util_fits_cpu() Hongyan Xia
2023-11-02 17:37   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] sched/uclamp: Remove all uclamp bucket logic Hongyan Xia
2023-11-03 13:50   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-11-03 14:01     ` Hongyan Xia
2023-10-04  9:04 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] sched/uclamp: Simplify uclamp_eff_value() Hongyan Xia
2023-11-03 14:50   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-10-30 18:46 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] sched: uclamp sum aggregation Dietmar Eggemann
2023-11-03 11:19   ` Hongyan Xia
2023-11-13  9:26     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-12-03  0:25 ` Qais Yousef
2023-12-04  1:48   ` Hongyan Xia
2023-12-04 16:12     ` Vincent Guittot
2023-12-05 15:18       ` Hongyan Xia
2023-12-05 16:26         ` Vincent Guittot
2023-12-05 17:23           ` Hongyan Xia

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=cda9bff0-1fcb-4736-93e7-19659cac9a01@arm.com \
    --to=hongyan.xia2@arm.com \
    --cc=christian.loehle@arm.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
    --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®