Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:24:47 +0800
From:	Charles Wang <muming.wq@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Tao Ma <tm@....ma>,
	含黛 <handai.szj@...bao.com>,
	Doug Smythies <dsmythies@...us.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate

On Tuesday, June 19, 2012 12:03 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> Hi Charles,
> 
> I'm having difficulties understanding your exact meaning, I suspect its
> a language thing, so please excuse me for nit-picking through your
> email.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 22:27 +0800, Charles Wang wrote:
> 
>> In our mind 
> 
> Are there more people involved?
> 
>> per-cpu sampling for cpu idle and non-idle is equal. But
>> actually may not.
> 
> Are you saying they should be equal but are in fact not so?



That's it. When a cpu enters idle, tick will be stopped, and sampling
couldn't execute on this idle cpu. Although idle will be folded, and
then be caculated into global calc_load_tasks[1], we not update
calc_load_update on this cpu, and sampling will be done after idle
exits[2]. The real load for this sampling time should be the load when
this cpu goes into idle([1]), and the sampling after idle exits [2] is
wrong. This's what i mean "sampling time line fix", not clear before. @_@

> 
> I think we can all agree on this. Doug has illustrated this quite
> clearly.
> 
> The desire is for CONFIG_NOHZ=n,y to function identically, but its been
> clearly demonstrated this is currently not the case.
> 
>>  For non-idle cpu sampling, it's right the load when
>> sampling. 
> 
> Agreed, sampling of a busy cpu is identical.
> 
>> But for idle, cause of nohz, the sampling will be delayed to
>> nohz exit(less than 1 tick after nohz exit). 
> 
> I don't think the nohz exit code calls into the load sampling, but I
> think you're saying we'll get a sample tick after we leave nohz, right?

yes

> 
> This is only so if the busy period covers a tick, that is, if we wake
> and go back to idle before a tick happens we'll still not get sampled.
> 


> 
>   tick          tick
>     |----====-----|
>          ^   ^
>        wake  sleep
>

This is the key point. We should take sampling in this cpu as idle load,
but cause of idle the sampling is delayed to a wrong place.

> 
> Shows a nohz-exit busy period not sampled.
> 
>> Nohz exit is always caused
>> by processes woken up--non-idle model. It's not fair here, idle
>> calculated to non-idle.
>>
>>      time-expect-sampling
>>                    |    time-do-sampling
>>                    |         |
>>                    V         V
>> -|-------------------------|--
>> start_nohz              stop_nohz
> 
> I don't think the delay in sampling is the biggest problem, I think the
> problem is the direct interaction between a cpu going idle and another
> cpu taking a sample.



Maybe "delay" is not the exactly, this sampling is totally wrong.

"A cpu going idle and another cpu taking a sample" is the premise,
missing the right sampling time and taking another wrong sample after
idle exits is the real reason.

> 
> So the approach I took was to isolate the going idle before the sample
> window from going idle during (and after) the sampling window.
> 
> Therefore any going idle activity will not affect the sampled of other
> cpus. The only trick is the slight shift in index flip for read vs
> write.
> 
> 
>   0             5             10            15
>     +10           +10           +10           +10
>   |-|-----------|-|-----------|-|-----------|-|
> 
> r:001           110           001           110
> w:011           100           011           100
> 

It's a wonderful plan to use index flip. Simple and effective.

> 
> Shows we'll read the old idle load, but write to the new idle load
> during the sample window. Thus including the old idle load in this
> sample fold, but leaving new activity for the next.


> 
> A cpu waking up and doing a sample is similar to the cpu being busy at
> the window start.
> 
> However since this window is 10 ticks long and any busy spanning a tick
> will make it appear 'busy' we can only accurately sample loads of up to
> HZ/(2*10) (2 for the sampling theorem). For a regular HZ=1000 kernel
> this ends up being 50 Hz.

> 
> Higher frequency workloads will appear to over-account.
> 
> Now the whole reason we have this window of 10 ticks is that we're
> trying to do a completely asynchronous load computation trying to avoid
> as much serialization as possible. So have each cpu account its local
> state and hope that 10 ticks is sufficient for all to have reported in,
> then process the fold.
> 
> The 10 tick window is directly related to the worst irq-off latency on
> your machine, if you keep IRQs disabled for a few ticks -- something
> that quite easily happens on large machines, even a busy cpu will be
> 'late' reporting its load. I think the current 10 tick came from an SGI
> machine with 4k cpus or so.
> 
> 
> Hmmm,.. idea.. OK, so we should also have a hook coming out of NOHZ
> state, when we come out of NOHZ state during the sample window, simply
> push the whole window fwd to the next time.

These two hooks can take over my work. I tried these before, but not
find the right place :(. So I tried the simple solution.

> 

> This finds another bug in the current code.. A cpu that has idled 'long'
> could be multiple LOAD_FREQ intervals behind and will take multiple
> samples in quick succession instead of 5s apart.
> 
> 
> Can someone please think through the below thing? its been compile
> tested only...
> 
> ---
>  kernel/sched/core.c      |  290 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  kernel/sched/idle_task.c |    1 -
>  kernel/sched/sched.h     |    2 -
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c |    2 +
>  4 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index d5594a4..3a49ee1 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2161,11 +2161,72 @@ unsigned long this_cpu_load(void)
>  }
>  
>  
> +/*
> + * global load-average calculations
> + *
> + * We take a distributed and async approach to calculating the global load-avg
> + * in order to minimize overhead.
> + *
> + * The global load average is an exponentially decaying average of nr_running +
> + * nr_uninterruptible.
> + *
> + * Once every LOAD_FREQ:
> + *
> + *   nr_active = 0;
> + *   for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> + *   	nr_active += cpu_of(cpu)->nr_running + cpu_of(cpu)->nr_uninterruptible;
> + *
> + *   avenrun[n] = avenrun[0] * exp_n + nr_active * (1 - exp_n)
> + *
> + * Due to a number of reasons the above turns in the mess below:
> + *
> + *  - for_each_possible_cpu() is prohibitively expensive on machines with
> + *    serious number of cpus, therefore we need to take a distributed approach
> + *    to calculating nr_active.
> + *
> + *        \Sum_i x_i(t) = \Sum_i x_i(t) - x_i(t_0) | x_i(t_0) := 0
> + *                      = \Sum_i { \Sum_j=1 x_i(t_j) - x_i(t_j-1) }
> + *
> + *    So assuming nr_active := 0 when we start out -- true per definition, we
> + *    can simply take per-cpu deltas and fold those into a global accumulate
> + *    to obtain the same result. See calc_load_fold_active().
> + *
> + *    Furthermore, in order to avoid synchronizing all per-cpu delta folding
> + *    across the machine, we assume 10 ticks is sufficient time for every
> + *    cpu to have completed this task.
> + *
> + *    This places an upper-bound on the IRQ-off latency of the machine. 
> + *
> + *  - cpu_rq()->nr_uninterruptible isn't accurately tracked per-cpu because
> + *    this would add another cross-cpu cacheline miss and atomic operation
> + *    to the wakeup path. Instead we increment on whatever cpu the task ran
> + *    when it went into uninterruptible state and decrement on whatever cpu
> + *    did the wakeup. This means that only the sum of nr_uninterruptible over
> + *    all cpus yields the correct result.
> + *
> + *  This covers the NO_HZ=n code, for extra head-aches, see the comment below.
> + */
> +
>  /* Variables and functions for calc_load */
>  static atomic_long_t calc_load_tasks;
>  static unsigned long calc_load_update;
>  unsigned long avenrun[3];
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(avenrun);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(avenrun); /* should be removed */
> +
> +/**
> + * get_avenrun - get the load average array
> + * @loads:	pointer to dest load array
> + * @offset:	offset to add
> + * @shift:	shift count to shift the result left
> + *
> + * These values are estimates at best, so no need for locking.
> + */
> +void get_avenrun(unsigned long *loads, unsigned long offset, int shift)
> +{
> +	loads[0] = (avenrun[0] + offset) << shift;
> +	loads[1] = (avenrun[1] + offset) << shift;
> +	loads[2] = (avenrun[2] + offset) << shift;
> +}
>  
>  static long calc_load_fold_active(struct rq *this_rq)
>  {
> @@ -2182,6 +2243,9 @@ static long calc_load_fold_active(struct rq *this_rq)
>  	return delta;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * a1 = a0 * e + a * (1 - e)
> + */
>  static unsigned long
>  calc_load(unsigned long load, unsigned long exp, unsigned long active)
>  {
> @@ -2193,30 +2257,117 @@ calc_load(unsigned long load, unsigned long exp, unsigned long active)
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ
>  /*
> - * For NO_HZ we delay the active fold to the next LOAD_FREQ update.
> + * Handle NO_HZ for the global load-average.
> + *
> + * Since the above described distributed algorithm to compute the global
> + * load-average relies on per-cpu sampling from the tick, it is affected by
> + * NO_HZ.
> + *
> + * The basic idea is to fold the nr_active delta into a global idle load upon
> + * entering NO_HZ state such that we can include this as an 'extra' cpu delta
> + * when we read the global state.
> + *
> + * Obviously reality has to ruin such a delightfully simple scheme:
> + *
> + *  - When we go NO_HZ idle during the window, we can negate our sample
> + *    contribution, causing under-accounting.
> + *
> + *    We avoid this by keeping two idle-delta counters and flipping them
> + *    when the window starts, thus separating old and new NO_HZ load.
> + *
> + *    The only trick is the slight shift in index flip for read vs write.
> + *
> + *       0             5             10            15
> + *         +10           +10           +10           +10
> + *       |-|-----------|-|-----------|-|-----------|-|
> + *    r:001           110           001           110
> + *    w:011           100           011           100
> + *
> + *    This ensures we'll fold the old idle contribution in this window while
> + *    accumlating the new one.
> + *
> + *  - When we wake up from NO_HZ idle during the window, we push up our
> + *    contribution, since we effectively move our sample point to a known
> + *    busy state.
> + *
> + *    This is solved by pushing the window forward, and thus skipping the
> + *    sample, for this cpu (effectively using the idle-delta for this cpu which
> + *    was in effect at the time the window opened). This also solves the issue
> + *    of having to deal with a cpu having been in NOHZ idle for multiple
> + *    LOAD_FREQ intervals.
>   *
>   * When making the ILB scale, we should try to pull this in as well.
>   */
> -static atomic_long_t calc_load_tasks_idle;
> +static atomic_long_t calc_load_idle[2];
> +static int calc_load_idx;
>  
> -void calc_load_account_idle(struct rq *this_rq)
> +static inline int calc_load_write_idx(void)
>  {
> +	int idx = calc_load_idx;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * See calc_global_nohz(), if we observe the new index, we also
> +	 * need to observe the new update time.
> +	 */
> +	smp_rmb();
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the folding window started, make sure we start writing in the
> +	 * next idle-load delta.
> +	 */
> +	if (!time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update))
> +		idx++;

Can we just take calc_load_update as the start time-line here?  Will
there be different ticks between cpus?

> +
> +	return idx & 1;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int calc_load_read_idx(void)
> +{
> +	return calc_load_idx & 1;
> +}
> +
> +void calc_load_enter_idle(void)
> +{
> +	struct rq *this_rq = this_rq();
>  	long delta;
> +	int idx;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * We're going into NOHZ mode, if there's any pending delta, fold it
> +	 * into the pending idle delta.
> +	 */
>  	delta = calc_load_fold_active(this_rq);
> -	if (delta)
> -		atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks_idle);
> +	if (delta) {
> +		idx = calc_load_write_idx();
> +		atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_idle[idx]);
> +	}
>  }
>  
> -static long calc_load_fold_idle(void)
> +void calc_load_exit_idle(void)
>  {
> -	long delta = 0;
> +	struct rq *this_rq = this_rq();
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Its got a race, we don't care...
> +	 * If we're still outside the sample window, we're done.
>  	 */
> -	if (atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks_idle))
> -		delta = atomic_long_xchg(&calc_load_tasks_idle, 0);
> +	if (time_before(jiffies, this_rq->calc_load_update))
> +		return;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We woke inside or after the sample window, this means another cpu
> +	 * likely already accounted us through the nohz accounting, so skip the
> +	 * entire deal and sync up for the next window.
> +	 */
> +	this_rq->calc_load_update = calc_load_update + LOAD_FREQ;
> +}
> +
> +static long calc_load_fold_idle(void)
> +{
> +	int idx = calc_load_read_idx();
> +	long delta = 0;
> +
> +	if (atomic_long_read(&calc_load_idle[idx]))
> +		delta = atomic_long_xchg(&calc_load_idle[idx], 0);
>  
>  	return delta;
>  }
> @@ -2302,66 +2453,39 @@ static void calc_global_nohz(void)
>  {
>  	long delta, active, n;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * If we crossed a calc_load_update boundary, make sure to fold
> -	 * any pending idle changes, the respective CPUs might have
> -	 * missed the tick driven calc_load_account_active() update
> -	 * due to NO_HZ.
> -	 */
> -	delta = calc_load_fold_idle();
> -	if (delta)
> -		atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * It could be the one fold was all it took, we done!
> -	 */
> -	if (time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10))
> -		return;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * Catch-up, fold however many we are behind still
> -	 */
> -	delta = jiffies - calc_load_update - 10;
> -	n = 1 + (delta / LOAD_FREQ);
> +	if (!time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * Catch-up, fold however many we are behind still
> +		 */
> +		delta = jiffies - calc_load_update - 10;
> +		n = 1 + (delta / LOAD_FREQ);
>  
> -	active = atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks);
> -	active = active > 0 ? active * FIXED_1 : 0;
> +		active = atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks);
> +		active = active > 0 ? active * FIXED_1 : 0;
>  
> -	avenrun[0] = calc_load_n(avenrun[0], EXP_1, active, n);
> -	avenrun[1] = calc_load_n(avenrun[1], EXP_5, active, n);
> -	avenrun[2] = calc_load_n(avenrun[2], EXP_15, active, n);
> +		avenrun[0] = calc_load_n(avenrun[0], EXP_1, active, n);
> +		avenrun[1] = calc_load_n(avenrun[1], EXP_5, active, n);
> +		avenrun[2] = calc_load_n(avenrun[2], EXP_15, active, n);
>  
> -	calc_load_update += n * LOAD_FREQ;
> -}
> -#else
> -void calc_load_account_idle(struct rq *this_rq)
> -{
> -}
> +		calc_load_update += n * LOAD_FREQ;
> +	}
>  
> -static inline long calc_load_fold_idle(void)
> -{
> -	return 0;
> +	/*
> +	 * Flip the idle index...
> +	 *
> +	 * Make sure we first write the new time then flip the index, so that
> +	 * calc_load_write_idx() will see the new time when it reads the new
> +	 * index, this avoids a double flip messing things up.
> +	 */
> +	smp_wmb();
> +	calc_load_idx++;
>  }
> +#else /* !CONFIG_NO_HZ */
>  
> -static void calc_global_nohz(void)
> -{
> -}
> -#endif
> +static inline long calc_load_fold_idle(void) { return 0; }
> +static inline void calc_global_nohz(void) { }
>  
> -/**
> - * get_avenrun - get the load average array
> - * @loads:	pointer to dest load array
> - * @offset:	offset to add
> - * @shift:	shift count to shift the result left
> - *
> - * These values are estimates at best, so no need for locking.
> - */
> -void get_avenrun(unsigned long *loads, unsigned long offset, int shift)
> -{
> -	loads[0] = (avenrun[0] + offset) << shift;
> -	loads[1] = (avenrun[1] + offset) << shift;
> -	loads[2] = (avenrun[2] + offset) << shift;
> -}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_NO_HZ */
>  
>  /*
>   * calc_load - update the avenrun load estimates 10 ticks after the
> @@ -2369,11 +2493,35 @@ void get_avenrun(unsigned long *loads, unsigned long offset, int shift)
>   */
>  void calc_global_load(unsigned long ticks)
>  {
> -	long active;
> +	long active, delta;
>  
>  	if (time_before(jiffies, calc_load_update + 10))
>  		return;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Fold the 'old' idle-delta to include all NO_HZ cpus.
> +	 *
> +	 *	cpu0	cpu1	cpu2	..
> +	 *
> +	 * >--- [sample A]
> +	 *
> +	 *			-> NOHZ
> +	 *		-> NOHZ
> +	 *	->NOHZ
> +	 *
> +	 * >--- [sample B]
> +	 *
> +	 * >--- [sample C]
> +	 *
> +	 *      NOHZ-> (here)
> +	 *
> +	 * Since all CPUs went into NOHZ state, all 'missed' samples (B, C)
> +	 * should include the folded idle-delta.
> +	 */
> +	delta += calc_load_fold_idle();
> +	if (delta)
> +		atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
> +
>  	active = atomic_long_read(&calc_load_tasks);
>  	active = active > 0 ? active * FIXED_1 : 0;
>  
> @@ -2384,12 +2532,7 @@ void calc_global_load(unsigned long ticks)
>  	calc_load_update += LOAD_FREQ;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Account one period with whatever state we found before
> -	 * folding in the nohz state and ageing the entire idle period.
> -	 *
> -	 * This avoids loosing a sample when we go idle between 
> -	 * calc_load_account_active() (10 ticks ago) and now and thus
> -	 * under-accounting.
> +	 * In case we idled for multiple LOAD_FREQ intervals, catch up in bulk.
>  	 */
>  	calc_global_nohz();
>  }
> @@ -2406,7 +2549,6 @@ static void calc_load_account_active(struct rq *this_rq)
>  		return;
>  
>  	delta  = calc_load_fold_active(this_rq);
> -	delta += calc_load_fold_idle();
>  	if (delta)
>  		atomic_long_add(delta, &calc_load_tasks);
>  
> @@ -2414,6 +2556,10 @@ static void calc_load_account_active(struct rq *this_rq)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> + * End of global load-average stuff
> + */
> +
> +/*
>   * The exact cpuload at various idx values, calculated at every tick would be
>   * load = (2^idx - 1) / 2^idx * load + 1 / 2^idx * cur_load
>   *
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle_task.c b/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> index b44d604..b6baf37 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle_task.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,6 @@ static void check_preempt_curr_idle(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int fl
>  static struct task_struct *pick_next_task_idle(struct rq *rq)
>  {
>  	schedstat_inc(rq, sched_goidle);
> -	calc_load_account_idle(rq);
>  	return rq->idle;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> index 6d52cea..55844f2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -942,8 +942,6 @@ static inline u64 sched_avg_period(void)
>  	return (u64)sysctl_sched_time_avg * NSEC_PER_MSEC / 2;
>  }
>  
> -void calc_load_account_idle(struct rq *this_rq);
> -
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 8699978..4a08472 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -406,6 +406,7 @@ static void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(struct tick_sched *ts)
>  		 */
>  		if (!ts->tick_stopped) {
>  			select_nohz_load_balancer(1);
> +			calc_load_enter_idle();
>  
>  			ts->idle_tick = hrtimer_get_expires(&ts->sched_timer);
>  			ts->tick_stopped = 1;
> @@ -597,6 +598,7 @@ void tick_nohz_idle_exit(void)
>  		account_idle_ticks(ticks);
>  #endif
>  
> +	calc_load_exit_idle();
>  	touch_softlockup_watchdog();
>  	/*
>  	 * Cancel the scheduled timer and restore the tick
> 
> 




--
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