Remove delayed tasks from util_est even they are runnable.
Exclude delayed task which are (a) migrating between rq's or (b) in a
SAVE/RESTORE dequeue/enqueue.
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/c49ef5fe-a909-43f1-b02f-a765ab9cedbf@arm.com
When analyzing a kernel waring message, Peter pointed out that there is a race
condition when the kworker is being frozen and falls into try_to_freeze() with
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, which could trigger a might_sleep() warning in try_to_freeze().
Although the root cause is not related to freeze()[1], it is still worthy to fix
this issue ahead.
One possible race scenario:
CPU 0 CPU 1
----- -----
// kthread_worker_fn
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
suspend_freeze_processes()
freeze_processes
static_branch_inc(&freezer_active);
freeze_kernel_threads
pm_nosig_freezing = true;
if (work) { //false
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
} else if (!freezing(current)) //false, been frozen
freezing():
if (static_branch_unlikely(&freezer_active))
if (pm_nosig_freezing)
return true;
schedule()
}
// state is still TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
try_to_freeze()
might_sleep() <--- warning
Fix this by explicitly set the TASK_RUNNING before entering
try_to_freeze().
Fixes: b56c0d8937 ("kthread: implement kthread_worker")
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Zs2ZoAcUsZMX2B%2FI@chenyu5-mobl2/ [1]
commit 97450eb909 ("sched/pelt: Remove shift of thermal clock")
removed the decay_shift for hw_pressure. This commit uses the
sched_clock_task() in sched_tick() while it replaces the
sched_clock_task() with rq_clock_pelt() in __update_blocked_others().
This could bring inconsistence. One possible scenario I can think of
is in ___update_load_sum():
u64 delta = now - sa->last_update_time
'now' could be calculated by rq_clock_pelt() from
__update_blocked_others(), and last_update_time was calculated by
rq_clock_task() previously from sched_tick(). Usually the former
chases after the latter, it cause a very large 'delta' and brings
unexpected behavior.
Fixes: 97450eb909 ("sched/pelt: Remove shift of thermal clock")
Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240827112607.181206-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com
Move effective_cpu_util() and sched_cpu_util() functions in fair.c file
with others utilization related functions.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240904092417.20660-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Since commit b2a02fc43a ("smp: Optimize
send_call_function_single_ipi()") an idle CPU in TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG mode
can be pulled out of idle by setting TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag to service an
IPI without actually sending an interrupt. Even in cases where the IPI
handler does not queue a task on the idle CPU, do_idle() will call
__schedule() since need_resched() returns true in these cases.
Introduce and use SM_IDLE to identify call to __schedule() from
schedule_idle() and shorten the idle re-entry time by skipping
pick_next_task() when nr_running is 0 and the previous task is the idle
task.
With the SM_IDLE fast-path, the time taken to complete a fixed set of
IPIs using ipistorm improves noticeably. Following are the numbers
from a dual socket Intel Ice Lake Xeon server (2 x 32C/64T) and
3rd Generation AMD EPYC system (2 x 64C/128T) (boost on, C2 disabled)
running ipistorm between CPU8 and CPU16:
cmdline: insmod ipistorm.ko numipi=100000 single=1 offset=8 cpulist=8 wait=1
==================================================================
Test : ipistorm (modified)
Units : Normalized runtime
Interpretation: Lower is better
Statistic : AMean
======================= Intel Ice Lake Xeon ======================
kernel: time [pct imp]
tip:sched/core 1.00 [baseline]
tip:sched/core + SM_IDLE 0.80 [20.51%]
==================== 3rd Generation AMD EPYC =====================
kernel: time [pct imp]
tip:sched/core 1.00 [baseline]
tip:sched/core + SM_IDLE 0.90 [10.17%]
==================================================================
[ kprateek: Commit message, SM_RTLOCK_WAIT fix ]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Not-yet-signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240809092240.6921-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com
In order to tell the previous sched_class what the next task is, add
put_prev_task(.next).
Notable SCX will use this to:
1) determine the next task will leave the SCX sched class and push
the current task to another CPU if possible.
2) statistics on how often and which other classes preempt it
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224016.367421076@infradead.org
When a task is selected through a dl_server, it will have p->dl_server
set, such that it can account runtime to the dl_server, see
update_curr_task().
Currently p->dl_server is set in pick*task() whenever it goes through
the dl_server, clearing it is a bit of a mess though. The trivial
solution is clearing it on the final put (now that we have this
location).
However, this gives a problem when:
p = pick_task(rq);
if (p)
put_prev_set_next_task(rq, prev, next);
picks the same task but through a different path, notably when it goes
from picking through the dl_server to a direct pick or vice-versa. In
that case we cannot readily determine wether we should clear or
preserve p->dl_server.
An additional complication is pick_*task() setting p->dl_server for a
remote pick, it might still need to update runtime before it schedules
the core_pick.
Close all these holes and remove all the random clearing of
p->dl_server by:
- having pick_*task() manage rq->dl_server
- having the final put_prev_task() clear p->dl_server
- having the first set_next_task() set p->dl_server = rq->dl_server
- complicate the core_sched code to save/restore rq->dl_server where
appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224016.259853414@infradead.org
The current rule is that:
pick_next_task() := pick_task() + set_next_task(.first = true)
And many classes implement it directly as such. Change things around
to make pick_next_task() optional while also changing the definition to:
pick_next_task(prev) := pick_task() + put_prev_task() + set_next_task(.first = true)
The reason is that sched_ext would like to have a 'final' call that
knows the next task. By placing put_prev_task() right next to
set_next_task() (as it already is for sched_core) this becomes
trivial.
As a bonus, this is a nice cleanup on its own.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224016.051225657@infradead.org
Abide by the simple rule:
pick_next_task() := pick_task() + set_next_task(.first = true)
This allows us to trivially get rid of server_pick_next() and things
collapse nicely.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224015.837303391@infradead.org
The rule is that:
pick_next_task() := pick_task() + set_next_task(.first = true)
Turns out, there's still a few things in pick_next_task() that are
missing from that combination.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224015.724111109@infradead.org
Turns out the core_sched bits forgot to use the
set_next_task(.first=true) variant. Notably:
pick_next_task() := pick_task() + set_next_task(.first = true)
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240813224015.614146342@infradead.org
__sched_setscheduler() goes through an enqueue/dequeue cycle like so:
flags := DEQUEUE_SAVE | DEQUEUE_MOVE | DEQUEUE_NOCLOCK;
prev_class->dequeue_task(rq, p, flags);
new_class->enqueue_task(rq, p, flags);
when prev_class := fair_sched_class, this is followed by:
dequeue_task(rq, p, DEQUEUE_NOCLOCK | DEQUEUE_SLEEP);
the idea being that since the task has switched classes, we need to drop
the sched_delayed logic and have that task be deactivated per its previous
dequeue_task(..., DEQUEUE_SLEEP).
Unfortunately, this leaves the task on_rq. This is missing the tail end of
dequeue_entities() that issues __block_task(), which __sched_setscheduler()
won't have done due to not using DEQUEUE_DELAYED - not that it should, as
it is pretty much a fair_sched_class specific thing.
Make switched_from_fair() properly deactivate sched_delayed tasks upon
class changes via __block_task(), as if a
dequeue_task(..., DEQUEUE_DELAYED)
had been issued.
Fixes: 2e0199df25 ("sched/fair: Prepare exit/cleanup paths for delayed_dequeue")
Reported-by: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240829135353.1524260-1-vschneid@redhat.com
In dl_server_start(), when schedstats is enabled, the following
happens:
dl_server_start()
dl_se->dl_server = 1;
enqueue_dl_entity()
update_stats_enqueue_dl()
__schedstats_from_dl_se()
dl_task_of()
BUG_ON(dl_server(dl_se));
Since only tasks have schedstats and internal entries do not, avoid
trying to update stats in this case.
Fixes: 63ba8422f8 ("sched/deadline: Introduce deadline servers")
Signed-off-by: Huang Shijie <shijie@os.amperecomputing.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240829031111.12142-1-shijie@os.amperecomputing.com
In the absence of an explicit cgroup slice configureation, make mixed
slice length work with cgroups by propagating the min_slice up the
hierarchy.
This ensures the cgroup entity gets timely service to service its
entities that have this timing constraint set on them.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.948188417@infradead.org
Allow applications to directly set a suggested request/slice length using
sched_attr::sched_runtime.
The implementation clamps the value to: 0.1[ms] <= slice <= 100[ms]
which is 1/10 the size of HZ=1000 and 10 times the size of HZ=100.
Applications should strive to use their periodic runtime at a high
confidence interval (95%+) as the target slice. Using a smaller slice
will introduce undue preemptions, while using a larger value will
increase latency.
For all the following examples assume a scheduling quantum of 8, and for
consistency all examples have W=4:
{A,B,C,D}(w=1,r=8):
ABCD...
+---+---+---+---
t=0, V=1.5 t=1, V=3.5
A |------< A |------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
D |------< D |------<
---+*------+-------+--- ---+--*----+-------+---
t=2, V=5.5 t=3, V=7.5
A |------< A |------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
D |------< D |------<
---+----*--+-------+--- ---+------*+-------+---
Note: 4 identical tasks in FIFO order
~~~
{A,B}(w=1,r=16) C(w=2,r=16)
AACCBBCC...
+---+---+---+---
t=0, V=1.25 t=2, V=5.25
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |--------------< B |--------------<
C |------< C |------<
---+*------+-------+--- ---+----*--+-------+---
t=4, V=8.25 t=6, V=12.25
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |--------------< B |--------------<
C |------< C |------<
---+-------*-------+--- ---+-------+---*---+---
Note: 1 heavy task -- because q=8, double r such that the deadline of the w=2
task doesn't go below q.
Note: observe the full schedule becomes: W*max(r_i/w_i) = 4*2q = 8q in length.
Note: the period of the heavy task is half the full period at:
W*(r_i/w_i) = 4*(2q/2) = 4q
~~~
{A,C,D}(w=1,r=16) B(w=1,r=8):
BAACCBDD...
+---+---+---+---
t=0, V=1.5 t=1, V=3.5
A |--------------< A |---------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |--------------< C |--------------<
D |--------------< D |--------------<
---+*------+-------+--- ---+--*----+-------+---
t=3, V=7.5 t=5, V=11.5
A |---------------< A |---------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |--------------< C |--------------<
D |--------------< D |--------------<
---+------*+-------+--- ---+-------+--*----+---
t=6, V=13.5
A |---------------<
B |------<
C |--------------<
D |--------------<
---+-------+----*--+---
Note: 1 short task -- again double r so that the deadline of the short task
won't be below q. Made B short because its not the leftmost task, but is
eligible with the 0,1,2,3 spread.
Note: like with the heavy task, the period of the short task observes:
W*(r_i/w_i) = 4*(1q/1) = 4q
~~~
A(w=1,r=16) B(w=1,r=8) C(w=2,r=16)
BCCAABCC...
+---+---+---+---
t=0, V=1.25 t=1, V=3.25
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
---+*------+-------+--- ---+--*----+-------+---
t=3, V=7.25 t=5, V=11.25
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
---+------*+-------+--- ---+-------+--*----+---
t=6, V=13.25
A |--------------<
B |------<
C |------<
---+-------+----*--+---
Note: 1 heavy and 1 short task -- combine them all.
Note: both the short and heavy task end up with a period of 4q
~~~
A(w=1,r=16) B(w=2,r=16) C(w=1,r=8)
BBCAABBC...
+---+---+---+---
t=0, V=1 t=2, V=5
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
---+*------+-------+--- ---+----*--+-------+---
t=3, V=7 t=5, V=11
A |--------------< A |--------------<
B |------< B |------<
C |------< C |------<
---+------*+-------+--- ---+-------+--*----+---
t=7, V=15
A |--------------<
B |------<
C |------<
---+-------+------*+---
Note: as before but permuted
~~~
From all this it can be deduced that, for the steady state:
- the total period (P) of a schedule is: W*max(r_i/w_i)
- the average period of a task is: W*(r_i/w_i)
- each task obtains the fair share: w_i/W of each full period P
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.842834421@infradead.org
Part of the reason to have shorter slices is to improve
responsiveness. Allow shorter slices to preempt longer slices on
wakeup.
Task | Runtime ms | Switches | Avg delay ms | Max delay ms | Sum delay ms |
100ms massive_intr 500us cyclictest NO_PREEMPT_SHORT
1 massive_intr:(5) | 846018.956 ms | 779188 | avg: 0.273 ms | max: 58.337 ms | sum:212545.245 ms |
2 massive_intr:(5) | 853450.693 ms | 792269 | avg: 0.275 ms | max: 71.193 ms | sum:218263.588 ms |
3 massive_intr:(5) | 843888.920 ms | 771456 | avg: 0.277 ms | max: 92.405 ms | sum:213353.221 ms |
1 chromium-browse:(8) | 53015.889 ms | 131766 | avg: 0.463 ms | max: 36.341 ms | sum:60959.230 ms |
2 chromium-browse:(8) | 53864.088 ms | 136962 | avg: 0.480 ms | max: 27.091 ms | sum:65687.681 ms |
3 chromium-browse:(9) | 53637.904 ms | 132637 | avg: 0.481 ms | max: 24.756 ms | sum:63781.673 ms |
1 cyclictest:(5) | 12615.604 ms | 639689 | avg: 0.471 ms | max: 32.272 ms | sum:301351.094 ms |
2 cyclictest:(5) | 12511.583 ms | 642578 | avg: 0.448 ms | max: 44.243 ms | sum:287632.830 ms |
3 cyclictest:(5) | 12545.867 ms | 635953 | avg: 0.475 ms | max: 25.530 ms | sum:302374.658 ms |
100ms massive_intr 500us cyclictest PREEMPT_SHORT
1 massive_intr:(5) | 839843.919 ms | 837384 | avg: 0.264 ms | max: 74.366 ms | sum:221476.885 ms |
2 massive_intr:(5) | 852449.913 ms | 845086 | avg: 0.252 ms | max: 68.162 ms | sum:212595.968 ms |
3 massive_intr:(5) | 839180.725 ms | 836883 | avg: 0.266 ms | max: 69.742 ms | sum:222812.038 ms |
1 chromium-browse:(11) | 54591.481 ms | 138388 | avg: 0.458 ms | max: 35.427 ms | sum:63401.508 ms |
2 chromium-browse:(8) | 52034.541 ms | 132276 | avg: 0.436 ms | max: 31.826 ms | sum:57732.958 ms |
3 chromium-browse:(8) | 55231.771 ms | 141892 | avg: 0.469 ms | max: 27.607 ms | sum:66538.697 ms |
1 cyclictest:(5) | 13156.391 ms | 667412 | avg: 0.373 ms | max: 38.247 ms | sum:249174.502 ms |
2 cyclictest:(5) | 12688.939 ms | 665144 | avg: 0.374 ms | max: 33.548 ms | sum:248509.392 ms |
3 cyclictest:(5) | 13475.623 ms | 669110 | avg: 0.370 ms | max: 37.819 ms | sum:247673.390 ms |
As per the numbers the, this makes cyclictest (short slice) it's
max-delay more consistent and consistency drops the sum-delay. The
trade-off is that the massive_intr (long slice) gets more context
switches and a slight increase in sum-delay.
Chunxin contributed did_preempt_short() where a task that lost slice
protection from PREEMPT_SHORT gets rescheduled once it becomes
in-eligible.
[mike: numbers]
Co-Developed-by: Chunxin Zang <zangchunxin@lixiang.com>
Signed-off-by: Chunxin Zang <zangchunxin@lixiang.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.735459544@infradead.org
During OSPM24 Youssef noted that migrations are re-setting the virtual
deadline. Notably everything that does a dequeue-enqueue, like setting
nice, changing preferred numa-node, and a myriad of other random crap,
will cause this to happen.
This shouldn't be. Preserve the relative virtual deadline across such
dequeue/enqueue cycles.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.625119246@infradead.org
Note that tasks that are kept on the runqueue to burn off negative
lag, are not in fact runnable anymore, they'll get dequeued the moment
they get picked.
As such, don't count this time towards runnable.
Thanks to Valentin for spotting I had this backwards initially.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.514088302@infradead.org
'Extend' DELAY_DEQUEUE by noting that since we wanted to dequeued them
at the 0-lag point, truncate lag (eg. don't let them earn positive
lag).
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.403750550@infradead.org
Extend / fix 86bfbb7ce4 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement") by
noting that lag is fundamentally a temporal measure. It should not be
carried around indefinitely.
OTOH it should also not be instantly discarded, doing so will allow a
task to game the system by purposefully (micro) sleeping at the end of
its time quantum.
Since lag is intimately tied to the virtual time base, a wall-time
based decay is also insufficient, notably competition is required for
any of this to make sense.
Instead, delay the dequeue and keep the 'tasks' on the runqueue,
competing until they are eligible.
Strictly speaking, we only care about keeping them until the 0-lag
point, but that is a difficult proposition, instead carry them around
until they get picked again, and dequeue them at that point.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.226163742@infradead.org
Since special task states must not suffer spurious wakeups, and the
proposed delayed dequeue can cause exactly these (under some boundary
conditions), propagate this knowledge into dequeue_task() such that it
can do the right thing.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105030.110439521@infradead.org
The special task states are those that do not suffer spurious wakeups,
TASK_FROZEN is very much one of those, mark it as such.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.998329901@infradead.org
Doing a wakeup on a delayed dequeue task is about as simple as it
sounds -- remove the delayed mark and enjoy the fact it was actually
still on the runqueue.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.888107381@infradead.org
Delayed dequeue's natural end is when it gets picked again. Ensure
pick_next_task() knows what to do with delayed tasks.
Note, this relies on the earlier patch that made pick_next_task()
state invariant -- it will restart the pick on dequeue, because
obviously the just dequeued task is no longer eligible.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.747330118@infradead.org
When dequeue_task() is delayed it becomes possible to exit a task (or
cgroup) that is still enqueued. Ensure things are dequeued before
freeing.
Thanks to Valentin for asking the obvious questions and making
switched_from_fair() less weird.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.631948434@infradead.org
Just a little sanity test..
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.486423066@infradead.org
Delayed dequeue has tasks sit around on the runqueue that are not
actually runnable -- specifically, they will be dequeued the moment
they get picked.
One side-effect is that such a task can get migrated, which leads to a
'nested' dequeue_task() scenario that messes up uclamp if we don't
take care.
Notably, dequeue_task(DEQUEUE_SLEEP) can 'fail' and keep the task on
the runqueue. This however will have removed the task from uclamp --
per uclamp_rq_dec() in dequeue_task(). So far so good.
However, if at that point the task gets migrated -- or nice adjusted
or any of a myriad of operations that does a dequeue-enqueue cycle --
we'll pass through dequeue_task()/enqueue_task() again. Without
modification this will lead to a double decrement for uclamp, which is
wrong.
Reported-by: Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>
Reported-by: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.315205425@infradead.org
While most of the delayed dequeue code can be done inside the
sched_class itself, there is one location where we do not have an
appropriate hook, namely ttwu_runnable().
Add an ENQUEUE_DELAYED call to the on_rq path to deal with waking
delayed dequeue tasks.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.200000445@infradead.org
As a preparation for dequeue_task() failing, and a second code-path
needing to take care of the 'success' path, split out the DEQEUE_SLEEP
path from deactivate_task().
Much thanks to Libo for spotting and fixing a TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING
ordering fail.
Fixed-by: Libo Chen <libo.chen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105029.086192709@infradead.org
Working towards delaying dequeue, notably also inside the hierachy,
rework dequeue_task_fair() such that it can 'resume' an interrupted
hierarchy walk.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.977256873@infradead.org
Change the function signature of sched_class::dequeue_task() to return
a boolean, allowing future patches to 'fail' dequeue.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.864630153@infradead.org
Implement pick_next_task_fair() in terms of pick_task_fair() to
de-duplicate the pick loop.
More importantly, this makes all the pick loops use the
state-invariant form, which is useful to introduce further re-try
conditions in later patches.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.725062368@infradead.org
With 4c456c9ad3 ("sched/fair: Remove unused 'curr' argument from
pick_next_entity()") curr is no longer being used, so no point in
clearing it.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.614707623@infradead.org
Per 54d27365ca ("sched/fair: Prevent throttling in early
pick_next_task_fair()") the reason check_cfs_rq_runtime() is under the
'if (curr)' check is to ensure the (downward) traversal does not
result in an empty cfs_rq.
But then the pick_task_fair() 'copy' of all this made it restart the
traversal anyway, so that seems to solve the issue too.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.501679876@infradead.org
Since commit e8f331bcc2 ("sched/smp: Use lag to simplify
cross-runqueue placement") the min_vruntime_copy is no longer used.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240727105028.395297941@infradead.org
Some find the name realtime overloaded. Use rt_or_dl() as an
alternative, hopefully better, name.
Suggested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240610192018.1567075-4-qyousef@layalina.io
rt_task() checks if a task has RT priority. But depends on your
dictionary, this could mean it belongs to RT class, or is a 'realtime'
task, which includes RT and DL classes.
Since this has caused some confusion already on discussion [1], it
seemed a clean up is due.
I define the usage of rt_task() to be tasks that belong to RT class.
Make sure that it returns true only for RT class and audit the users and
replace the ones required the old behavior with the new realtime_task()
which returns true for RT and DL classes. Introduce similar
realtime_prio() to create similar distinction to rt_prio() and update
the users that required the old behavior to use the new function.
Move MAX_DL_PRIO to prio.h so it can be used in the new definitions.
Document the functions to make it more obvious what is the difference
between them. PI-boosted tasks is a factor that must be taken into
account when choosing which function to use.
Rename task_is_realtime() to realtime_task_policy() as the old name is
confusing against the new realtime_task().
No functional changes were intended.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240506100509.GL40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qyousef@layalina.io>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240610192018.1567075-2-qyousef@layalina.io
This code has an integer overflow or sign extension bug which was caught
by gcc-13:
kernel/sched/debug.c:341:57: error: integer overflow in expression of
type 'long int' results in '-100663296' [-Werror=overflow]
341 | static unsigned long fair_server_period_max = (1 << 22) * NSEC_PER_USEC; /* ~4 seconds */
The result is that "fair_server_period_max" is set to 0xfffffffffa000000
(585 years) instead of instead of 0xfa000000 (4 seconds) that was
intended.
Fix this by changing the type to shift from (1 << 22) to (1UL << 22).
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYtE2GAbeqU+AOCffgo2oH0RTJUxU+=Pi3cFn4di_KgBAQ@mail.gmail.com/
Fixes: d741f297bc ("sched/fair: Fair server interface")
Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/a936b991-e464-4bdf-94ab-08e25d364986@stanley.mountain
balance_fair() skips newidle balancing if rq->nr_running - there are already
tasks on the rq, so no need to try to pull tasks. This tests the total
number of queued tasks on the CPU instead of only the fair class, but is
still correct as the rq can currently only have fair class tasks while
balance_fair() is running.
However, with the addition of sched_ext below the fair class, this will not
hold anymore and make put_prev_task_balance() skip sched_ext's balance()
incorrectly as, when a CPU has only lower priority class tasks,
rq->nr_running would still be positive and balance_fair() would return 1
even when fair doesn't have any tasks to run.
Update balance_fair() to use sched_fair_runnable() which tests
rq->cfs.nr_running which is updated by bandwidth throttling. Note that
pick_next_task_fair() already uses sched_fair_runnable() in its optimized
path for the same purpose.
Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZrFUjlCf7x3TNXB8@slm.duckdns.org
The throttle interaction made my brain hurt, make it consistently
about 0 transitions of h_nr_running.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Now that fair_server exists, we no longer need RT bandwidth control
unless RT_GROUP_SCHED.
Enable fair_server with parameters equivalent to RT throttling.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/14d562db55df5c3c780d91940743acb166895ef7.1716811044.git.bristot@kernel.org
* Use simple CFS pick_task for DL pick_task
DL server's pick_task calls CFS's pick_next_task_fair(), this is wrong
because core scheduling's pick_task only calls CFS's pick_task() for
evaluation / checking of the CFS task (comparing across CPUs), not for
actually affirmatively picking the next task. This causes RB tree
corruption issues in CFS that were found by syzbot.
* Make pick_task_fair clear DL server
A DL task pick might set ->dl_server, but it is possible the task will
never run (say the other HT has a stop task). If the CFS task is picked
in the future directly (say without DL server), ->dl_server will be
set. So clear it in pick_task_fair().
This fixes the KASAN issue reported by syzbot in set_next_entity().
(DL refactoring suggestions by Vineeth Pillai).
Reported-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Signed-off-by: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b10489ab1f03d23e08e6097acea47442e7d6466f.1716811044.git.bristot@kernel.org
In core scheduling, a DL server pick (which is CFS task) should be
given higher priority than tasks in other classes.
Not doing so causes CFS starvation. A kselftest is added later to
demonstrate this. A CFS task that is competing with RT tasks can
be completely starved without this and the DL server's boosting
completely ignored.
Fix these problems.
Reported-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Signed-off-by: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/48b78521d86f3b33c24994d843c1aad6b987dda9.1716811044.git.bristot@kernel.org
Add an interface for fair server setup on debugfs.
Each CPU has two files under /debug/sched/fair_server/cpu{ID}:
- runtime: set runtime in ns
- period: set period in ns
This then leaves /proc/sys/kernel/sched_rt_{period,runtime}_us to set
bounds on admission control.
The interface also add the server to the dl bandwidth accounting.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/a9ef9fc69bcedb44bddc9bc34f2b313296052819.1716811044.git.bristot@kernel.org
Among the motivations for the DL servers is the real-time throttling
mechanism. This mechanism works by throttling the rt_rq after
running for a long period without leaving space for fair tasks.
The base dl server avoids this problem by boosting fair tasks instead
of throttling the rt_rq. The point is that it boosts without waiting
for potential starvation, causing some non-intuitive cases.
For example, an IRQ dispatches two tasks on an idle system, a fair
and an RT. The DL server will be activated, running the fair task
before the RT one. This problem can be avoided by deferring the
dl server activation.
By setting the defer option, the dl_server will dispatch an
SCHED_DEADLINE reservation with replenished runtime, but throttled.
The dl_timer will be set for the defer time at (period - runtime) ns
from start time. Thus boosting the fair rq at defer time.
If the fair scheduler has the opportunity to run while waiting
for defer time, the dl server runtime will be consumed. If
the runtime is completely consumed before the defer time, the
server will be replenished while still in a throttled state. Then,
the dl_timer will be reset to the new defer time
If the fair server reaches the defer time without consuming
its runtime, the server will start running, following CBS rules
(thus without breaking SCHED_DEADLINE). Then the server will
continue the running state (without deferring) until it fair
tasks are able to execute as regular fair scheduler (end of
the starvation).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/dd175943c72533cd9f0b87767c6499204879cc38.1716811044.git.bristot@kernel.org
