| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 14:41:26 +0100
From: Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Andres Oportus <andresoportus@...gle.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steve Muckle <smuckle.linux@...il.com>,
Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] cpufreq: schedutil: ensure max frequency while
running RT/DL tasks
[+Brendan]
On 05-Jul 11:31, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 04-07-17, 18:34, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > index 004ae18..98704d8 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> > @@ -216,6 +216,7 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> > struct cpufreq_policy *policy = sg_policy->policy;
> > unsigned long util, max;
> > unsigned int next_f;
> > + bool rt_mode;
> > bool busy;
> >
> > /* Skip updates generated by sugov kthreads */
> > @@ -230,7 +231,15 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> >
> > busy = sugov_cpu_is_busy(sg_cpu);
> >
> > - if (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL) {
> > + /*
> > + * While RT/DL tasks are running we do not want FAIR tasks to
> > + * overvrite this CPU's flags, still we can update utilization and
> > + * frequency (if required/possible) to be fair with these tasks.
> > + */
> > + rt_mode = task_has_dl_policy(current) ||
> > + task_has_rt_policy(current) ||
> > + (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL);
>
> We may want to create a separate inline function for above, as it is already
> used twice in this patch.
Good idea.
> But I was wondering if we can get some help from the scheduler to avoid such
> code here. I understand that we don't want to do the aggregation in the
> scheduler to keep it clean and keep such governor specific thing here.
Indeed.
> But what about clearing the sched-class's flag from .pick_next_task() callback
> when they return NULL ?
>
> What about something like this instead (completely untested), with which we
> don't need the 2/3 patch as well:
Just had a fast check but I think something like that can work.
We had an internal discussion with Brendan (in CC now) which had a
similar proposal.
Main counter arguments for me was:
1. we wanna to reduce the pollution of scheduling classes code with
schedutil specific code, unless strictly necessary
2. we never had a "clear bit" semantics for flags updates
Thus this proposal seemed to me less of a discontinuity wrt the
current interface. However, something similar to what you propose
below should also work. Let's collect some more feedback...
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/cpufreq.h b/include/linux/sched/cpufreq.h
> index d2be2ccbb372..e81a6b5591f5 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/cpufreq.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/cpufreq.h
> @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@
> #define SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL (1U << 1)
> #define SCHED_CPUFREQ_IOWAIT (1U << 2)
>
> +#define SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR (1U << 31)
> +#define SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR_RT (SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR | SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT)
> +#define SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR_DL (SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR | SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL)
> +
> #define SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT_DL (SCHED_CPUFREQ_RT | SCHED_CPUFREQ_DL)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> index 076a2e31951c..f32e15d59d62 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
> @@ -218,6 +218,9 @@ static void sugov_update_single(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
> unsigned int next_f;
> bool busy;
>
> + if (flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR)
> + return;
Here we should still clear the flags, like what we do for the shared
case... just to keep the internal status consiste with the
notifications we have got from the scheduling classes.
> +
> sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags);
> sg_cpu->last_update = time;
>
> @@ -296,7 +299,13 @@ static void sugov_update_shared(struct update_util_data *hook, u64 time,
>
> sg_cpu->util = util;
> sg_cpu->max = max;
> - sg_cpu->flags = flags;
> +
> + if (unlikely(flags & SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR)) {
> + sg_cpu->flags &= ~(flags & ~SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + sg_cpu->flags |= flags;
>
> sugov_set_iowait_boost(sg_cpu, time, flags);
> sg_cpu->last_update = time;
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> index a2ce59015642..441d6153d654 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> @@ -1203,8 +1203,10 @@ pick_next_task_dl(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> if (prev->sched_class == &dl_sched_class)
> update_curr_dl(rq);
>
> - if (unlikely(!dl_rq->dl_nr_running))
> + if (unlikely(!dl_rq->dl_nr_running)) {
> + cpufreq_update_this_cpu(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR_DL);
> return NULL;
> + }
>
> put_prev_task(rq, prev);
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> index 979b7341008a..bca9e4bb7ec4 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> @@ -1556,8 +1556,10 @@ pick_next_task_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> if (prev->sched_class == &rt_sched_class)
> update_curr_rt(rq);
>
> - if (!rt_rq->rt_queued)
> + if (!rt_rq->rt_queued) {
> + cpufreq_update_this_cpu(rq, SCHED_CPUFREQ_CLEAR_RT);
> return NULL;
> + }
>
> put_prev_task(rq, prev);
>
> --
> viresh
--
#include <best/regards.h>
Patrick Bellasi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists