mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <swood@redhat.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched,rt: break out of load balancing if an RT task appears
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 17:33:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa406883f0eace37fe7f658814e29f82a4f0addf.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jhjees7s29u.mognet@arm.com>

On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 22:56 +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 28/04/20 06:02, Scott Wood wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > index dfde7f0ce3db..e7437e4e40b4 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -9394,6 +9400,10 @@ static int should_we_balance(struct lb_env *env)
> >       struct sched_group *sg = env->sd->groups;
> >       int cpu, balance_cpu = -1;
> > 
> > +	/* Run the realtime task now; load balance later. */
> > +	if (rq_has_runnable_rt_task(env->dst_rq))
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> 
> I have a feeling this isn't very nice to CFS tasks, since we would now
> "waste" load-balance attempts if they happen to coincide with an RT task
> being runnable.
>
> On your 72 CPUs machine, the system-wide balance happens (at best) every
> 72ms if you have idle time, every ~2300ms otherwise (every balance
> CPU gets to try to balance however, so it's not as horrible as I'm making
> it sound). This is totally worst-case scenario territory, and you'd hope
> newidle_balance() could help here and there (as it isn't gated by any
> balance interval).
> 
> Still, even for a single rq, postponing a system-wide balance for a
> full balance interval (i.e. ~2 secs worst case here) just because we had a
> single RT task running when we tried to balance seems a bit much.
> 
> It may be possible to hack something to detect those cases and reset the
> interval to "now" when e.g. dequeuing the last RT task (& after having
> previously aborted a load-balance due to RT/DL/foobar).

Yeah, some way to retry at an appropriate time after aborting a rebalance
would be good.


> > +
> > +/* Is there a task of a high priority class? */
> > +static inline bool rq_has_runnable_rt_task(struct rq *rq)
> > +{
> > +	return unlikely(rq->nr_running != rq->cfs.h_nr_running);
> 
> Seeing as that can be RT, DL or stopper, that name is somewhat misleading.

rq_has_runnable_rt_dl_task()?  Or is there some term that unambiguously
encompasses both?

-Scott



  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-28 22:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-28  5:02 [RFC PATCH 0/3] newidle_balance() latency mitigation Scott Wood
2020-04-28  5:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] sched/fair: Call newidle_balance() from finish_task_switch() Scott Wood
2020-04-28 21:37   ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-28 22:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-28 22:55       ` Scott Wood
2020-04-28 23:02         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-28 23:20           ` Scott Wood
2020-04-29  9:05             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-30  1:31               ` Scott Wood
2020-05-11 10:58                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-11 12:13                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-28 22:33     ` Scott Wood
2020-04-29 12:00       ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-29  8:27   ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-30  1:36     ` Scott Wood
2020-04-28  5:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] sched/fair: Enable interrupts when dropping lock in newidle_balance() Scott Wood
2020-04-28  5:02 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched,rt: break out of load balancing if an RT task appears Scott Wood
2020-04-28 21:56   ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-28 22:33     ` Scott Wood [this message]
2020-04-28 22:52       ` Scott Wood
2020-04-29 12:01       ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-28 13:27 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] newidle_balance() latency mitigation Steven Rostedt
2020-04-29 23:13 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-30  7:44   ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-30 10:14     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-30 12:42       ` Vincent Guittot
2020-04-30 13:56         ` Valentin Schneider
2020-04-30 12:48 ` Vincent Guittot

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=fa406883f0eace37fe7f658814e29f82a4f0addf.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=swood@redhat.com \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --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®