linux-kernel - Re: scheduler oddity [bug?]

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:45:24 +0100
From:	Balazs Scheidler <bazsi@...abit.hu>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scheduler oddity [bug?]

On Sat, 2009-03-07 at 19:47 +0100, Balazs Scheidler wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-03-07 at 18:47 +0100, Balazs Scheidler wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've tested this on 3 computers and each showed the same symptoms:
> >  * quad core Opteron, running Ubuntu kernel 2.6.27-13.29
> >  * Core 2 Duo, running Ubuntu kernel 2.6.27-11.27
> >  * Dual Core Opteron, Debian backports.org kernel 2.6.26-13~bpo40+1
> > 
> > Is this a bug, or a feature?
> > 
> 
> One new interesting information: I've retested with a 2.6.22 based
> kernel, and it still works there, setting the CPU affinity does not
> change the performance of the test program and mpstat nicely shows that
> 2 cores are working, not just one.
> 
> Maybe this is CFS related? That was merged for 2.6.23 IIRC.
> 
> Also, I tried changing various scheduler knobs
> in /proc/sys/kernel/sched_* but they didn't help. I've tried to change
> these:
> 
>  * sched_migration_cost: changed from the default 500000 to 100000 and
> then 10000 but neither helped.
>  * sched_nr_migrate: increased it to 64, but again nothing
> 
> I'm starting to think that this is a regression that may or may not be
> related to CFS. 
> 
> I don't have a box where I could bisect on, but the test program makes
> the problem quite obvious.

Some more test results:

Latest tree from Linus seems to work, at least the program runs on both
cores as it should. I bisected the patch that changed behaviour, and
I've found this:

commit 38736f475071b80b66be28af7b44c854073699cc
Author: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Date:   Sat Sep 6 14:50:23 2008 +0530

    sched: fix __load_balance_iterator() for cfq with only one task
    
    The __load_balance_iterator() returns a NULL when there's only one
    sched_entity which is a task. It is caused by the following code-path.
    
    	/* Skip over entities that are not tasks */
    	do {
    		se = list_entry(next, struct sched_entity, group_node);
    		next = next->next;
    	} while (next != &cfs_rq->tasks && !entity_is_task(se));
    
    	if (next == &cfs_rq->tasks)
    		return NULL;
    	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
          This will return NULL even when se is a task.
    
    As a side-effect, there was a regression in sched_mc behavior since 2.6.25,
    since iter_move_one_task() when it calls load_balance_start_fair(),
    would not get any tasks to move!
    
    Fix this by checking if the last entity was a task or not.
    
    Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
    Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>


This patch was integrated for 2.6.28. With the above patch, my test program uses 
two cores as it should. I could only test this in a virtual machine so I don't 
know exact performance metrics, but I'll test 2.6.27 + plus this patch on a real 
box tomorrow to see if this was the culprit.

I'm not sure if this is related to the avg_overlap discussion (which I honestly 
don't really understand :)


-- 
Bazsi


--
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/