Message-ID: <546C6D53.2020007@arm.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:13:39 +0000
From:	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To:	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...allels.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] sched/deadline: support dl task migration during cpu
 hotplug

Hi,

On 18/11/14 23:18, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> Hi Juri,
> On 11/12/14, 11:08 PM, Juri Lelli wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 12/11/14 01:06, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> I observe that dl task can't be migrated to other cpus during cpu hotplug,
>>> in addition, task may/may not be running again if cpu is added back. The
>>> root cause which I found is that dl task will be throtted and removed from
>>> dl rq after comsuming all budget, which leads to stop task can't pick it up
>>> from dl rq and migrate to other cpus during hotplug.
>>>
>>> The method to reproduce:
>>> schedtool -E -t 50000:100000 -e ./test
>>> Actually test is just a simple for loop. Then observe which cpu the test
>>> task is on.
>>> echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuN/online
>>>
>>> This patch adds the dl task migration during cpu hotplug by finding a most
>>> suitable later deadline rq after dl timer fire if current rq is offline,
>>> if fail to find a suitable later deadline rq then fallback to any eligible
>>> online cpu in order that the deadline task will come back to us, and the
>>> push/pull mechanism should then move it around properly.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> v4 -> v5:
>>>   * remove raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock)
>>>   * cleanup codes, spotted by Peterz
>>>   * cleanup patch description
>>> v3 -> v4:
>>>   * use tsk_cpus_allowed wrapper
>>>   * fix compile error
>>> v2 -> v3:
>>>   * don't get_task_struct
>>>   * if cannot preempt any rq, fallback to pick any online cpus
>>>   * use cpu_active_mask as original later_mask if cpu is offline
>>> v1 -> v2:
>>>   * push the task to another cpu in dl_task_timer() if rq is offline.
>>>
>>>   kernel/sched/deadline.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> index f3d7776..7c31906 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
>>> @@ -487,6 +487,7 @@ static int start_dl_timer(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, bool boosted)
>>>   	return hrtimer_active(&dl_se->dl_timer);
>>>   }
>>>   
>>> +static struct rq *find_lock_later_rq(struct task_struct *task, struct rq *rq);
>>>   /*
>>>    * This is the bandwidth enforcement timer callback. If here, we know
>>>    * a task is not on its dl_rq, since the fact that the timer was running
>>> @@ -538,6 +539,43 @@ again:
>>>   	update_rq_clock(rq);
>>>   	dl_se->dl_throttled = 0;
>>>   	dl_se->dl_yielded = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	/*
>>> +	 * So if we find that the rq the task was on is no longer
>>> +	 * available, we need to select a new rq.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	if (unlikely(!rq->online)) {
>>> +		struct rq *later_rq = NULL;
>>> +
>>> +		later_rq = find_lock_later_rq(p, rq);
>>> +
>>> +		if (!later_rq) {
>>> +			int cpu;
>>> +
>>> +			/*
>>> +			 * If cannot preempt any rq, fallback to pick any
>>> +			 * online cpu.
>>> +			 */
>>> +			cpu = cpumask_any_and(cpu_active_mask,
>>> +					tsk_cpus_allowed(p));
>>> +			if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) {
>>> +				pr_warn("fail to find any online cpu and task will never come back\n");
>>> +				goto unlock;
>>> +			}
>>> +			later_rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
>>> +		}
>>> +
>>> +		deactivate_task(rq, p, 0);
>>> +		set_task_cpu(p, later_rq->cpu);
>>> +		activate_task(later_rq, p, 0);
>>> +
>>> +		resched_curr(later_rq);
>>> +
>>> +		double_unlock_balance(rq, later_rq);
>>> +
>>> +		goto unlock;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>>   	if (task_on_rq_queued(p)) {
>>>   		enqueue_task_dl(rq, p, ENQUEUE_REPLENISH);
>>>   		if (dl_task(rq->curr))
>>> @@ -1185,8 +1223,9 @@ static int find_later_rq(struct task_struct *task)
>>>   	 * We have to consider system topology and task affinity
>>>   	 * first, then we can look for a suitable cpu.
>>>   	 */
>>> -	cpumask_copy(later_mask, task_rq(task)->rd->span);
>>> -	cpumask_and(later_mask, later_mask, cpu_active_mask);
>>> +	cpumask_copy(later_mask, cpu_active_mask);
>>> +	if (likely(task_rq(task)->online))
>>> +		cpumask_and(later_mask, later_mask, task_rq(task)->rd->span);
>> So, here you consider the span only when the task_rq is online,
>> but there might be others cpus still online belonging to the same
>> rd->span. And you have to consider them when migrating. Actually,
>> migration must still be restricted to the online cpus of task's
>> original rd->span, or I fear you can break clustered scheduling.
> 
> Sorry, what's clustered scheduling?
> 

It's a scheduling configuration in which you restrict tasks to run in
disjoint subsets of system CPUs. Translated to what we have, it's what
you get when you create exclusive cpusets (each one gets a rd) and
associate tasks to them.

My concern in what above is that you may end up breaking this setup
if you don't consider the sd->span when one of the CPUs of your
cpuset is off. But, Pang Xunlei patches may solve this, I still have to
check :/.

Thanks,

- Juri

> Regards,
> Wanpeng Li
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> - Juri
>>
>>>   	cpumask_and(later_mask, later_mask, &task->cpus_allowed);
>>>   	best_cpu = cpudl_find(&task_rq(task)->rd->cpudl,
>>>   			task, later_mask);
>>>
>> --
>> 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/
> 
> 

--
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