| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20080630180702.GC23606@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:37:02 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/30] sched: revert the revert of: weight calculations
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> [2008-06-27 13:41:11]:
> Try again..
>
> initial commit: 8f1bc385cfbab474db6c27b5af1e439614f3025c
> revert: f9305d4a0968201b2818dbed0dc8cb0d4ee7aeb3
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---
>
> ---
> kernel/sched.c | 9 +---
> kernel/sched_fair.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> kernel/sched_features.h | 1
> 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -1342,6 +1342,9 @@ static void __resched_task(struct task_s
> */
> #define SRR(x, y) (((x) + (1UL << ((y) - 1))) >> (y))
>
> +/*
> + * delta *= weight / lw
> + */
> static unsigned long
> calc_delta_mine(unsigned long delta_exec, unsigned long weight,
> struct load_weight *lw)
> @@ -1369,12 +1372,6 @@ calc_delta_mine(unsigned long delta_exec
> return (unsigned long)min(tmp, (u64)(unsigned long)LONG_MAX);
> }
>
> -static inline unsigned long
> -calc_delta_fair(unsigned long delta_exec, struct load_weight *lw)
> -{
> - return calc_delta_mine(delta_exec, NICE_0_LOAD, lw);
> -}
> -
> static inline void update_load_add(struct load_weight *lw, unsigned long inc)
> {
> lw->weight += inc;
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_fair.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_fair.c
> @@ -334,6 +334,34 @@ int sched_nr_latency_handler(struct ctl_
> #endif
>
> /*
> + * delta *= w / rw
> + */
> +static inline unsigned long
> +calc_delta_weight(unsigned long delta, struct sched_entity *se)
> +{
> + for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> + delta = calc_delta_mine(delta,
> + se->load.weight, &cfs_rq_of(se)->load);
> + }
> +
> + return delta;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * delta *= rw / w
> + */
> +static inline unsigned long
> +calc_delta_fair(unsigned long delta, struct sched_entity *se)
> +{
> + for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> + delta = calc_delta_mine(delta,
> + cfs_rq_of(se)->load.weight, &se->load);
> + }
> +
> + return delta;
> +}
> +
These functions can do with better comments
delta is scaled up as we move up the hierarchy
Why is calc_delta_weight() different from calc_delta_fair()?
> +/*
> * The idea is to set a period in which each task runs once.
> *
> * When there are too many tasks (sysctl_sched_nr_latency) we have to stretch
> @@ -362,47 +390,54 @@ static u64 __sched_period(unsigned long
> */
> static u64 sched_slice(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> {
> - u64 slice = __sched_period(cfs_rq->nr_running);
> -
> - for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> - cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
> -
> - slice *= se->load.weight;
> - do_div(slice, cfs_rq->load.weight);
> - }
> -
> -
> - return slice;
> + return calc_delta_weight(__sched_period(cfs_rq->nr_running), se);
> }
>
> /*
> * We calculate the vruntime slice of a to be inserted task
> *
> - * vs = s/w = p/rw
> + * vs = s*rw/w = p
> */
> static u64 sched_vslice_add(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> {
> unsigned long nr_running = cfs_rq->nr_running;
> - unsigned long weight;
> - u64 vslice;
>
> if (!se->on_rq)
> nr_running++;
>
> - vslice = __sched_period(nr_running);
> + return __sched_period(nr_running);
Do we always return a constant value based on nr_running? Am I
misreading the diff by any chance?
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * The goal of calc_delta_asym() is to be asymmetrically around NICE_0_LOAD, in
> + * that it favours >=0 over <0.
> + *
> + * -20 |
> + * |
> + * 0 --------+-------
> + * .'
> + * 19 .'
> + *
> + */
> +static unsigned long
> +calc_delta_asym(unsigned long delta, struct sched_entity *se)
> +{
> + struct load_weight lw = {
> + .weight = NICE_0_LOAD,
> + .inv_weight = 1UL << (WMULT_SHIFT-NICE_0_SHIFT)
> + };
Could you please explain this
weight is 1 << 10
and inv_weight is 1 << 22
>
> for_each_sched_entity(se) {
> - cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
> + struct load_weight *se_lw = &se->load;
>
> - weight = cfs_rq->load.weight;
> - if (!se->on_rq)
> - weight += se->load.weight;
> + if (se->load.weight < NICE_0_LOAD)
> + se_lw = &lw;
Why do we do this?
>
> - vslice *= NICE_0_LOAD;
> - do_div(vslice, weight);
> + delta = calc_delta_mine(delta,
> + cfs_rq_of(se)->load.weight, se_lw);
> }
>
> - return vslice;
> + return delta;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -419,11 +454,7 @@ __update_curr(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, str
>
> curr->sum_exec_runtime += delta_exec;
> schedstat_add(cfs_rq, exec_clock, delta_exec);
> - delta_exec_weighted = delta_exec;
> - if (unlikely(curr->load.weight != NICE_0_LOAD)) {
> - delta_exec_weighted = calc_delta_fair(delta_exec_weighted,
> - &curr->load);
> - }
> + delta_exec_weighted = calc_delta_fair(delta_exec, curr);
> curr->vruntime += delta_exec_weighted;
> }
>
> @@ -609,8 +640,17 @@ place_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, stru
>
> if (!initial) {
> /* sleeps upto a single latency don't count. */
> - if (sched_feat(NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS))
> - vruntime -= sysctl_sched_latency;
> + if (sched_feat(NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS)) {
> + unsigned long thresh = sysctl_sched_latency;
> +
> + /*
> + * convert the sleeper threshold into virtual time
> + */
> + if (sched_feat(NORMALIZED_SLEEPER))
> + thresh = calc_delta_fair(thresh, se);
> +
> + vruntime -= thresh;
> + }
>
> /* ensure we never gain time by being placed backwards. */
> vruntime = max_vruntime(se->vruntime, vruntime);
> @@ -1111,11 +1151,10 @@ static unsigned long wakeup_gran(struct
> unsigned long gran = sysctl_sched_wakeup_granularity;
>
> /*
> - * More easily preempt - nice tasks, while not making
> - * it harder for + nice tasks.
> + * More easily preempt - nice tasks, while not making it harder for
> + * + nice tasks.
> */
> - if (unlikely(se->load.weight > NICE_0_LOAD))
> - gran = calc_delta_fair(gran, &se->load);
> + gran = calc_delta_asym(sysctl_sched_wakeup_granularity, se);
>
> return gran;
> }
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched_features.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched_features.h
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched_features.h
> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
> SCHED_FEAT(NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS, 1)
> +SCHED_FEAT(NORMALIZED_SLEEPER, 1)
> SCHED_FEAT(WAKEUP_PREEMPT, 1)
> SCHED_FEAT(START_DEBIT, 1)
> SCHED_FEAT(AFFINE_WAKEUPS, 1)
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists