[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190118160520.GD11503@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 17:05:20 +0100
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Alakesh Haloi <alakeshh@...zon.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix bandwidth timer clock drift condition
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 07:52:08PM +0000, Alakesh Haloi wrote:
> [ Upstream commit 512ac999d2755d2b7109e996a76b6fb8b888631d ]
>
> I noticed that cgroup task groups constantly get throttled even
> if they have low CPU usage, this causes some jitters on the response
> time to some of our business containers when enabling CPU quotas.
>
> It's very simple to reproduce:
>
> mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/test
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu/test
> echo 100000 > cpu.cfs_quota_us
> echo $$ > tasks
>
> then repeat:
>
> cat cpu.stat | grep nr_throttled # nr_throttled will increase steadily
>
> After some analysis, we found that cfs_rq::runtime_remaining will
> be cleared by expire_cfs_rq_runtime() due to two equal but stale
> "cfs_{b|q}->runtime_expires" after period timer is re-armed.
>
> The current condition to judge clock drift in expire_cfs_rq_runtime()
> is wrong, the two runtime_expires are actually the same when clock
> drift happens, so this condtion can never hit. The orginal design was
> correctly done by this commit:
>
> a9cf55b28610 ("sched: Expire invalid runtime")
>
> ... but was changed to be the current implementation due to its locking bug.
>
> This patch introduces another way, it adds a new field in both structures
> cfs_rq and cfs_bandwidth to record the expiration update sequence, and
> uses them to figure out if clock drift happens (true if they are equal).
>
> Signed-off-by: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> [alakeshh: backport: Fixed merge conflicts:
> - sched.h: Fix the indentation and order in which the variables are
> declared to match with coding style of the existing code in 4.14
> Struct members of same type were declared in separate lines in
> upstream patch which has been changed back to having multiple
> members of same type in the same line.
> e.g. int a; int b; -> int a, b; ]
Now queued up, thanks!
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists