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  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:	Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:23:06 +0200
From:	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	jhladky@...hat.com, ktkhai@...allels.com,
	tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a
 busier sd

On 25 July 2014 21:32, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
> Subject: sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd
>
> Currently update_sd_pick_busiest only identifies the busiest sd
> that is either overloaded, or has a group imbalance. When no
> sd is imbalanced or overloaded, the load balancer fails to find
> the busiest domain.
>
> This breaks load balancing between domains that are not overloaded,
> in the !SD_ASYM_PACKING case. This patch makes update_sd_pick_busiest
> return true when the busiest sd yet is encountered.
>
> Behaviour for SD_ASYM_PACKING does not seem to match the comment,
> but I have no hardware to test that so I have left the behaviour
> of that code unchanged.
>
> It is unclear what to do with the group_imb condition.
> Should group_imb override a busier load? If so, should we fix

IMHO, group_imb should have a lower priority compared to overloaded
group because it generates active migration whereas the use of
overloaded group could solve the imbalance with normal migration
Then, AFAICT, we already have a special way to compute imbalance when
group_imb is set

> calculate_imbalance to return a sensible number when the "busiest"
> node found has a below average load? We probably need to fix
> calculate_imbalance anyway, to deal with an overloaded group that
> happens to have a below average load...
>
> Cc: mikey@...ling.org
> Cc: peterz@...radead.org
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 45943b2..c96044f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -5949,6 +5949,11 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>                 sgs->group_has_free_capacity = 1;
>  }
>
> +static bool group_overloaded(struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
> +{
> +       return sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_capacity_factor;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * update_sd_pick_busiest - return 1 on busiest group
>   * @env: The load balancing environment.
> @@ -5957,7 +5962,7 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>   * @sgs: sched_group statistics
>   *
>   * Determine if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
> - * busiest group.
> + * busiest group.
>   *
>   * Return: %true if @sg is a busier group than the previously selected
>   * busiest group. %false otherwise.
> @@ -5967,13 +5972,17 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
>                                    struct sched_group *sg,
>                                    struct sg_lb_stats *sgs)
>  {
> +       if (group_overloaded(sgs) && !group_overloaded(&sds->busiest_stat))

The 1st time you run update_sd_pick_busiest, group_capacity_factor and
sum_nr_running of sds->busiest_stat are uninitialized.

> +               return true;
> +

IIUC your new test sequence, you haven't solved the following use case:

group A has 3 tasks and is overloaded
group B has 2 tasks and is not overloaded but its avg_load is higher
than group B (either because of nice priority or because of average
runnable time)

The test of group A will return true because it is overloaded and not
the empty busiest_stat
But, the test of group B will also return true because of
!(env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING)

So at the end you are selecting the group B which is  not overloaded

>         if (sgs->avg_load <= sds->busiest_stat.avg_load)
>                 return false;
>
> -       if (sgs->sum_nr_running > sgs->group_capacity_factor)
> +       if (sgs->group_imb)
>                 return true;
>
> -       if (sgs->group_imb)
> +       /* This is the busiest node. */
> +       if (!(env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING))
>                 return true;
>
>         /*
> @@ -5981,8 +5990,7 @@ static bool update_sd_pick_busiest(struct lb_env *env,
>          * numbered CPUs in the group, therefore mark all groups
>          * higher than ourself as busy.
>          */
> -       if ((env->sd->flags & SD_ASYM_PACKING) && sgs->sum_nr_running &&
> -           env->dst_cpu < group_first_cpu(sg)) {
> +       if (sgs->sum_nr_running && env->dst_cpu < group_first_cpu(sg)) {
>                 if (!sds->busiest)
>                         return true;
>
>
--
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