Message-ID: <750BB828-1AAE-4DED-A460-CF8ADDE3CFDA@tencent.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Jul 2020 04:06:17 +0000
From:   benbjiang(蒋彪) <benbjiang@...cent.com>
To:     Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vpillai@...italocean.com>
CC:     Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@...italocean.com>,
        Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@...italocean.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Tim Chen" <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "pjt@...gle.com" <pjt@...gle.com>,
        "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com" <subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com>,
        "fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "kerrnel@...gle.com" <kerrnel@...gle.com>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@...il.com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.intel@...il.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "vineethrp@...il.com" <vineethrp@...il.com>,
        "Chen Yu" <yu.c.chen@...el.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/16] sched: Trivial forced-newidle balancer(Internet
 mail)

Hi,

> On Jul 1, 2020, at 5:32 AM, Vineeth Remanan Pillai <vpillai@...italocean.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> 
> When a sibling is forced-idle to match the core-cookie; search for
> matching tasks to fill the core.
> 
> rcu_read_unlock() can incur an infrequent deadlock in
> sched_core_balance(). Fix this by using the RCU-sched flavor instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> ---
> include/linux/sched.h |   1 +
> kernel/sched/core.c   | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> kernel/sched/idle.c   |   1 +
> kernel/sched/sched.h  |   6 ++
> 4 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 3c8dcc5ff039..4f9edf013df3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -688,6 +688,7 @@ struct task_struct {
> #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_CORE
> 	struct rb_node			core_node;
> 	unsigned long			core_cookie;
> +	unsigned int			core_occupation;
> #endif
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 4d6d6a678013..fb9edb09ead7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -201,6 +201,21 @@ static struct task_struct *sched_core_find(struct rq *rq, unsigned long cookie)
> 	return match;
> }
> 
> +static struct task_struct *sched_core_next(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long cookie)
> +{
> +	struct rb_node *node = &p->core_node;
> +
> +	node = rb_next(node);
> +	if (!node)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	p = container_of(node, struct task_struct, core_node);
> +	if (p->core_cookie != cookie)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	return p;
> +}
> +
> /*
>  * The static-key + stop-machine variable are needed such that:
>  *
> @@ -4233,7 +4248,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> 	struct task_struct *next, *max = NULL;
> 	const struct sched_class *class;
> 	const struct cpumask *smt_mask;
> -	int i, j, cpu;
> +	int i, j, cpu, occ = 0;
> 	bool need_sync;
> 
> 	if (!sched_core_enabled(rq))
> @@ -4332,6 +4347,9 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> 				goto done;
> 			}
> 
> +			if (!is_idle_task(p))
> +				occ++;
> +
> 			rq_i->core_pick = p;
> 
> 			/*
> @@ -4357,6 +4375,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
> 
> 						cpu_rq(j)->core_pick = NULL;
> 					}
> +					occ = 1;
> 					goto again;
> 				} else {
> 					/*
> @@ -4393,6 +4412,8 @@ next_class:;
> 		if (is_idle_task(rq_i->core_pick) && rq_i->nr_running)
> 			rq_i->core_forceidle = true;
> 
> +		rq_i->core_pick->core_occupation = occ;
> +
> 		if (i == cpu)
> 			continue;
> 
> @@ -4408,6 +4429,114 @@ next_class:;
> 	return next;
> }
> 
> +static bool try_steal_cookie(int this, int that)
> +{
> +	struct rq *dst = cpu_rq(this), *src = cpu_rq(that);
> +	struct task_struct *p;
> +	unsigned long cookie;
> +	bool success = false;
> +
> +	local_irq_disable();
> +	double_rq_lock(dst, src);
> +
> +	cookie = dst->core->core_cookie;
> +	if (!cookie)
> +		goto unlock;
> +
> +	if (dst->curr != dst->idle)
> +		goto unlock;
> +
> +	p = sched_core_find(src, cookie);
> +	if (p == src->idle)
> +		goto unlock;
> +
> +	do {
> +		if (p == src->core_pick || p == src->curr)
> +			goto next;
> +
> +		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(this, &p->cpus_mask))
> +			goto next;
> +
> +		if (p->core_occupation > dst->idle->core_occupation)
> +			goto next;
> +
> +		p->on_rq = TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING;
> +		deactivate_task(src, p, 0);
> +		set_task_cpu(p, this);
> +		activate_task(dst, p, 0);
> +		p->on_rq = TASK_ON_RQ_QUEUED;
> +
> +		resched_curr(dst);
> +
> +		success = true;
> +		break;
> +
> +next:
> +		p = sched_core_next(p, cookie);
> +	} while (p);
> +
> +unlock:
> +	double_rq_unlock(dst, src);
> +	local_irq_enable();
> +
> +	return success;
> +}
> +
> +static bool steal_cookie_task(int cpu, struct sched_domain *sd)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for_each_cpu_wrap(i, sched_domain_span(sd), cpu) {
Since (i == cpu) should be skipped, should we start iteration at cpu+1? like,
	for_each_cpu_wrap(i, sched_domain_span(sd), cpu+1) {
		…
	}
In that way, we could avoid hitting following if(i == cpu) always.
> +		if (i == cpu)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		if (need_resched())
> +			break;
Should we return true here to accelerate the breaking of sched_core_balance? 
Otherwise the breaking would be delayed to the next level sd iteration.
> +
> +		if (try_steal_cookie(cpu, i))
> +			return true;
> +	}
> +
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
> +static void sched_core_balance(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +	struct sched_domain *sd;
> +	int cpu = cpu_of(rq);
> +
> +	rcu_read_lock_sched();
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irq(rq_lockp(rq));
> +	for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> +		if (!(sd->flags & SD_LOAD_BALANCE))
> +			break;
> +
> +		if (need_resched())
> +			break;
If rescheded here, we missed the chance to do further forced-newidle balance, 
and the idle-core could be idle for a long time, because lacking of pulling chance.
Could it be possible to add a new forced-newidle balance chance in task_tick_idle?
which could make it more efficient.

> +		if (steal_cookie_task(cpu, sd))
> +			break;
> +	}
> +	raw_spin_lock_irq(rq_lockp(rq));
> +	rcu_read_unlock_sched();
> +}
> +
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct callback_head, core_balance_head);
> +
> +void queue_core_balance(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +	if (!sched_core_enabled(rq))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!rq->core->core_cookie)
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!rq->nr_running) /* not forced idle */
> +		return;
> +
> +	queue_balance_callback(rq, &per_cpu(core_balance_head, rq->cpu), sched_core_balance);
> +}
> +
> #else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_CORE */
> 
> static struct task_struct *
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index a8d40ffab097..dff6ba220ed7 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -395,6 +395,7 @@ static void set_next_task_idle(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, bool fir
> {
> 	update_idle_core(rq);
> 	schedstat_inc(rq->sched_goidle);
> +	queue_core_balance(rq);
> }
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> index 293aa1ae0308..464559676fd2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -1089,6 +1089,8 @@ static inline raw_spinlock_t *rq_lockp(struct rq *rq)
> bool cfs_prio_less(struct task_struct *a, struct task_struct *b);
> void sched_core_adjust_sibling_vruntime(int cpu, bool coresched_enabled);
> 
> +extern void queue_core_balance(struct rq *rq);
> +
> #else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_CORE */
> 
> static inline bool sched_core_enabled(struct rq *rq)
> @@ -1101,6 +1103,10 @@ static inline raw_spinlock_t *rq_lockp(struct rq *rq)
> 	return &rq->__lock;
> }
> 
> +static inline void queue_core_balance(struct rq *rq)
> +{
> +}
> +
> #endif /* CONFIG_SCHED_CORE */
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists