From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C856EC3A59F for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E092080C for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="V5ZR6Xz1" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732388AbfHZRiZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:38:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:43816 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728280AbfHZRiZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:38:25 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id v12so12237375pfn.10 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 10:38:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=tTusFdpElP2TSQjgB9wqdpC9r5hygfBOjwSB4cOVhWk=; b=V5ZR6Xz1vT1lQEWb5Z9s8YhW85MxT+4EtE5tpZ8PvPPBugGSN8HnbeypGOfAmWJACz RcwbsokM9i82NkbABrGCtGqUlL30kFmScE1QiBrB5GczMawXOkSB7LR+6MQIkwXb0025 yyIMtkIdvWDx8ffZg6cJ4gSOPR0B46+BmXvRMc/L8Kz94f7ixEiyq1x+dZlgOwEwBe4f U978IImjCP5Ocdb8825xY8OPQVaw6hCj0HBPW7KUGx9CuFlQ95SKtKlv9QnMuwcKBKeh Hkn5oh5FPSjUGR7zH7DWIf6P6D8EcVamo8EmrdpXSnJ6lzzhm8TzdwHguGNXWPTuPKnJ NMCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=tTusFdpElP2TSQjgB9wqdpC9r5hygfBOjwSB4cOVhWk=; b=tRaExiv18c3o/uArcAJYlRQ3+oaFjbsbyJX9JE/8SQKNnaXqXJ8X2r7Nt7CAi3y7r/ /sKhFf7sqri+alEi0xm/iZg32T+nBcFth7egaMgTp4eKJDzX+QFgz8D6RxfQ6Uv0hsR0 KMUTJbJI3S1Mkn0QVeiGA6TmC2z1dLC9BIsPOtVq3DFEstnSyMYTyhq6TWCh0ZvbiTaD IKEzJlUOCrgFaqUpYwgsA7F1WwDL/bAZHZQvaC8kMXIwrie2FJb22Mt7d8js3Rntm7Xi gHOfbOjayJ1Pfi7/5Br5OzU8nloxmgRKOnsYKsKZiIJgYsoGHiR/F49PMyQM2HiavCMa n86A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVUZ7p/D9sAYoNCC1WAJKoO3IeSNdGHXFJmAp0rdfS4jeSbz64W V5iVYHQ+3W9RmB3ZZAnJTpAulA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzLQNC8HuihL9494jGRneLz1dGcEpdYaPSkTMgN6E5IpA2x8wJg5Pt78SCsaRkzKrrvkDWN6w== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9393:: with SMTP id t19mr20643596pfe.12.1566841104018; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 10:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com.localhost ([2620:15c:2cd:202:39d7:98b3:2536:e93f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d16sm16768998pfd.81.2019.08.26.10.38.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 10:38:22 -0700 (PDT) From: bsegall@google.com To: Valentin Schneider Cc: Liangyan , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shanpeic@linux.alibaba.com, xlpang@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: don't assign runtime for throttled cfs_rq References: <20190814180021.165389-1-liangyan.peng@linux.alibaba.com> <942ae15c-ffa5-74da-208b-7e82df917e16@arm.com> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 10:38:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: <942ae15c-ffa5-74da-208b-7e82df917e16@arm.com> (Valentin Schneider's message of "Sat, 24 Aug 2019 00:19:02 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Valentin Schneider writes: > On 23/08/2019 21:00, bsegall@google.com wrote: > [...] >> Could you mention in the message that this a throttled cfs_rq can have >> account_cfs_rq_runtime called on it because it is throttled before >> idle_balance, and the idle_balance calls update_rq_clock to add time >> that is accounted to the task. >> > > Mayhaps even a comment for the extra condition. > >> I think this solution is less risky than unthrottling >> in this area, so other than that: >> >> Reviewed-by: Ben Segall >> > > If you don't mind squashing this in: > > -----8<----- > diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c > index b1d9cec9b1ed..b47b0bcf56bc 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c > @@ -4630,6 +4630,10 @@ static u64 distribute_cfs_runtime(struct cfs_bandwidth *cfs_b, u64 remaining) > if (!cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq)) > goto next; > > + /* By the above check, this should never be true */ > + WARN_ON(cfs_rq->runtime_remaining > 0); > + > + /* Pick the minimum amount to return to a positive quota state */ > runtime = -cfs_rq->runtime_remaining + 1; > if (runtime > remaining) > runtime = remaining; > ----->8----- > > I'm not adamant about the extra comment, but the WARN_ON would be nice IMO. > > > @Ben, do you reckon we want to strap > > Cc: > Fixes: ec12cb7f31e2 ("sched: Accumulate per-cfs_rq cpu usage and charge against bandwidth") > > to the thing? AFAICT the pick_next_task_fair() + idle_balance() dance you > described should still be possible on that commit. I'm not sure about stable policy in general, but it seems reasonable. The WARN_ON might want to be WARN_ON_ONCE, and it seems fine to have it or not. > > > Other than that, > > Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider > > [...]