linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 09/14] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator

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]

Message-ID: <20180802130337.uf6tlac2hg4nkbwr@queper01-lin>
Date:   Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:03:38 +0100
From:   Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        morten.rasmussen@....com, chris.redpath@....com,
        patrick.bellasi@....com, valentin.schneider@....com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, thara.gopinath@...aro.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, tkjos@...gle.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        smuckle@...gle.com, adharmap@...cinc.com, skannan@...cinc.com,
        pkondeti@...eaurora.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        edubezval@...il.com, srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com,
        currojerez@...eup.net, javi.merino@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/14] sched: Add over-utilization/tipping point
 indicator

On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 14:26:29 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:25:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > @@ -5100,8 +5118,17 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
> >  		update_cfs_group(se);
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if (!se)
> > +	if (!se) {
> >  		add_nr_running(rq, 1);
> > +		/*
> > +		 * The utilization of a new task is 'wrong' so wait for it
> > +		 * to build some utilization history before trying to detect
> > +		 * the overutilized flag.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)
> > +			update_overutilized_status(rq);
> > +
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	hrtick_update(rq);
> >  }
> 
> That is a somewhat dodgy hack. There is no guarantee what so ever that
> when the task wakes next its history is any better. The comment doesn't
> reflect this I feel.

AFAICT the main use-case here is to avoid re-enabling the load balance
and ruining all the task placement because of a tiny task. I don't
really see how we can do that differently ...

Or am I missing something Morten ?

In the meantime, I can try to improve the comment at least :-)

Thanks,
Quentin