| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtDrWCenxtVcunjS3pGD81TdLf2EkhO_YcdfxnUHXpVF3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 09:33:55 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Song Zhang <zhangsong34@...wei.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
mcgrof@...nel.org, keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Introduce priority load balance for CFS
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 04:01, Song Zhang <zhangsong34@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply!
>
> On 2022/11/3 2:01, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 04:54, Song Zhang <zhangsong34@...wei.com> wrote:
> >>
> >
> > This really looks like a v3 of
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220810015636.3865248-1-zhangsong34@huawei.com/
> >
> > Please keep versioning.
> >
> >> Add a new sysctl interface:
> >> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_prio_load_balance_enabled
> >
> > We don't want to add more sysctl knobs for the scheduler, we even
> > removed some. Knob usually means that you want to fix your use case
> > but the solution doesn't make sense for all cases.
> >
>
> OK, I will remove this knobs later.
>
> >>
> >> 0: default behavior
> >> 1: enable priority load balance for CFS
> >>
> >> For co-location with idle and non-idle tasks, when CFS do load balance,
> >> it is reasonable to prefer migrating non-idle tasks and migrating idle
> >> tasks lastly. This will reduce the interference by SCHED_IDLE tasks
> >> as much as possible.
> >
> > I don't agree that it's always the best choice to migrate a non-idle task 1st.
> >
> > CPU0 has 1 non idle task and CPU1 has 1 non idle task and hundreds of
> > idle task and there is an imbalance between the 2 CPUS: migrating the
> > non idle task from CPU1 to CPU0 is not the best choice
> >
>
> If the non idle task on CPU1 is running or cache hot, it cannot be
> migrated and idle tasks can also be migrated from CPU1 to CPU0. So I
> think it does not matter.
What I mean is that migrating non idle tasks first is not a universal
win and not always what we want.
>
> >>
> >> Testcase:
> >> - Spawn large number of idle(SCHED_IDLE) tasks occupy CPUs
> >
> > What do you mean by a large number ?
> >
> >> - Let non-idle tasks compete with idle tasks for CPU time.
> >>
> >> Using schbench to test non-idle tasks latency:
> >> $ ./schbench -m 1 -t 10 -r 30 -R 200
> >
> > How many CPUs do you have ?
> >
>
> OK, some details may not be mentioned.
> My virtual machine has 8 CPUs running with a schbench process and 5000
> idle tasks. The idle task is a while dead loop process below:
How can you care about latency when you start 10 workers on 8 vCPUs
with 5000 non idle threads ?
>
> $ cat idle_process.c
> int main()
> {
> int i = 0;
> while(1) {
> usleep(500);
> for(i = 0; i < 1000000; i++);
> }
> }
>
> You can compile and spawn 5000 idle(SCHED_IDLE) tasks occupying 8 CPUs
> and execute schbench command to test it.
>
> >>
> >> Test result:
> >> 1.Default behavior
> >> Latency percentiles (usec) runtime 30 (s) (4562 total samples)
> >> 50.0th: 62528 (2281 samples)
> >> 75.0th: 623616 (1141 samples)
> >> 90.0th: 764928 (687 samples)
> >> 95.0th: 824320 (225 samples)
> >> *99.0th: 920576 (183 samples)
> >> 99.5th: 953344 (23 samples)
> >> 99.9th: 1008640 (18 samples)
> >> min=9, max=1074466
> >>
> >> 2.Enable priority load balance
> >> Latency percentiles (usec) runtime 30 (s) (4391 total samples)
> >> 50.0th: 22624 (2204 samples)
> >> 75.0th: 48832 (1092 samples)
> >> 90.0th: 85376 (657 samples)
> >> 95.0th: 113280 (220 samples)
> >> *99.0th: 182528 (175 samples)
> >> 99.5th: 206592 (22 samples)
> >> 99.9th: 290304 (17 samples)
> >> min=6, max=351815
> >>
> >> From percentile details, we see the benefit of priority load balance
> >> that 95% of non-idle tasks latencies stays no more than 113ms, while
> >
> > But even 113ms seems quite a large number if there is anything else
> > but 10 schbench workers and a bunch of idle threads that are running.
> >
> >> non-idle tasks latencies has got almost 50% over 600ms if priority
> >> load balance not enabled.
> >
> > Als have you considered enabling sched_feature LB_MIN ?
> >
>
> I have tried to echo LB_MIN > /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features, but this
> feature seems make no sense.
>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Song Zhang <zhangsong34@...wei.com>
> >> ---
> >> include/linux/sched/sysctl.h | 4 +++
> >> init/Kconfig | 10 ++++++
> >> kernel/sched/core.c | 3 ++
> >> kernel/sched/fair.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >> kernel/sched/sched.h | 3 ++
> >> kernel/sysctl.c | 11 +++++++
> >> 6 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/sysctl.h b/include/linux/sched/sysctl.h
> >> index 303ee7dd0c7e..9b3673269ecc 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/sched/sysctl.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/sched/sysctl.h
> >> @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ extern unsigned int sysctl_numa_balancing_promote_rate_limit;
> >> #define sysctl_numa_balancing_mode 0
> >> #endif
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> +extern unsigned int sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled;
> >> +#endif
> >> +
> >> int sysctl_numa_balancing(struct ctl_table *table, int write, void *buffer,
> >> size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos);
> >>
> >> diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
> >> index 694f7c160c9c..b0dfe6701218 100644
> >> --- a/init/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/init/Kconfig
> >> @@ -1026,6 +1026,16 @@ config CFS_BANDWIDTH
> >> restriction.
> >> See Documentation/scheduler/sched-bwc.rst for more information.
> >>
> >> +config SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + bool "Priority load balance for CFS"
> >> + depends on SMP
> >> + default n
> >> + help
> >> + This feature enable CFS priority load balance to reduce
> >> + non-idle tasks latency interferenced by SCHED_IDLE tasks.
> >> + It prefer migrating non-idle tasks firstly and
> >> + migrating SCHED_IDLE tasks lastly.
> >> +
> >> config RT_GROUP_SCHED
> >> bool "Group scheduling for SCHED_RR/FIFO"
> >> depends on CGROUP_SCHED
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> index 5800b0623ff3..9be35431fdd5 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >> @@ -9731,6 +9731,9 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
> >> rq->max_idle_balance_cost = sysctl_sched_migration_cost;
> >>
> >> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->cfs_tasks);
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->cfs_idle_tasks);
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> rq_attach_root(rq, &def_root_domain);
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> index e4a0b8bd941c..bdeb04324f0c 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >> @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ static int __init setup_sched_thermal_decay_shift(char *str)
> >> }
> >> __setup("sched_thermal_decay_shift=", setup_sched_thermal_decay_shift);
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> +unsigned int sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled;
> >> +#endif
> >> +
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> /*
> >> * For asym packing, by default the lower numbered CPU has higher priority.
> >> @@ -3199,6 +3203,21 @@ static inline void update_scan_period(struct task_struct *p, int new_cpu)
> >>
> >> #endif /* CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING */
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> +static void
> >> +adjust_rq_cfs_tasks(
> >> + void (*list_op)(struct list_head *, struct list_head *),
> >> + struct rq *rq,
> >> + struct sched_entity *se)
> >> +{
> >> + if (sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled &&
> >> + task_has_idle_policy(task_of(se)))
> >> + (*list_op)(&se->group_node, &rq->cfs_idle_tasks);
> >> + else
> >> + (*list_op)(&se->group_node, &rq->cfs_tasks);
> >> +}
> >> +#endif
> >> +
> >> static void
> >> account_entity_enqueue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> >> {
> >> @@ -3208,7 +3227,11 @@ account_entity_enqueue(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> >> struct rq *rq = rq_of(cfs_rq);
> >>
> >> account_numa_enqueue(rq, task_of(se));
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + adjust_rq_cfs_tasks(list_add, rq, se);
> >> +#else
> >> list_add(&se->group_node, &rq->cfs_tasks);
> >> +#endif
> >> }
> >> #endif
> >> cfs_rq->nr_running++;
> >> @@ -7631,7 +7654,11 @@ done: __maybe_unused;
> >> * the list, so our cfs_tasks list becomes MRU
> >> * one.
> >> */
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + adjust_rq_cfs_tasks(list_move, rq, &p->se);
> >> +#else
> >> list_move(&p->se.group_node, &rq->cfs_tasks);
> >> +#endif
> >> #endif
> >>
> >> if (hrtick_enabled_fair(rq))
> >> @@ -8156,11 +8183,18 @@ static void detach_task(struct task_struct *p, struct lb_env *env)
> >> static struct task_struct *detach_one_task(struct lb_env *env)
> >> {
> >> struct task_struct *p;
> >> + struct list_head *tasks = &env->src_rq->cfs_tasks;
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + bool has_detach_idle_tasks = false;
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> lockdep_assert_rq_held(env->src_rq);
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> +again:
> >> +#endif
> >> list_for_each_entry_reverse(p,
> >> - &env->src_rq->cfs_tasks, se.group_node) {
> >> + tasks, se.group_node) {
> >> if (!can_migrate_task(p, env))
> >> continue;
> >>
> >> @@ -8175,6 +8209,13 @@ static struct task_struct *detach_one_task(struct lb_env *env)
> >> schedstat_inc(env->sd->lb_gained[env->idle]);
> >> return p;
> >> }
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + if (sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled && !has_detach_idle_tasks) {
> >> + has_detach_idle_tasks = true;
> >> + tasks = &env->src_rq->cfs_idle_tasks;
> >> + goto again;
> >> + }
> >> +#endif
> >> return NULL;
> >> }
> >>
> >> @@ -8190,6 +8231,9 @@ static int detach_tasks(struct lb_env *env)
> >> unsigned long util, load;
> >> struct task_struct *p;
> >> int detached = 0;
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + bool has_detach_idle_tasks = false;
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> lockdep_assert_rq_held(env->src_rq);
> >>
> >> @@ -8205,6 +8249,9 @@ static int detach_tasks(struct lb_env *env)
> >> if (env->imbalance <= 0)
> >> return 0;
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> +again:
> >> +#endif
> >> while (!list_empty(tasks)) {
> >> /*
> >> * We don't want to steal all, otherwise we may be treated likewise,
> >> @@ -8310,6 +8357,14 @@ static int detach_tasks(struct lb_env *env)
> >> list_move(&p->se.group_node, tasks);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + if (sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled &&
> >> + !has_detach_idle_tasks && env->imbalance > 0) {
> >> + has_detach_idle_tasks = true;
> >> + tasks = &env->src_rq->cfs_idle_tasks;
> >> + goto again;
> >> + }
> >> +#endif
> >> /*
> >> * Right now, this is one of only two places we collect this stat
> >> * so we can safely collect detach_one_task() stats here rather
> >> @@ -11814,7 +11869,11 @@ static void set_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, bool first)
> >> * Move the next running task to the front of the list, so our
> >> * cfs_tasks list becomes MRU one.
> >> */
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + adjust_rq_cfs_tasks(list_move, rq, se);
> >> +#else
> >> list_move(&se->group_node, &rq->cfs_tasks);
> >> +#endif
> >> }
> >> #endif
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >> index 1644242ecd11..1b831c05ba30 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> >> @@ -1053,6 +1053,9 @@ struct rq {
> >> int online;
> >>
> >> struct list_head cfs_tasks;
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + struct list_head cfs_idle_tasks;
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> struct sched_avg avg_rt;
> >> struct sched_avg avg_dl;
> >> diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> >> index 188c305aeb8b..5fc0f9ffb675 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> >> @@ -2090,6 +2090,17 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
> >> .extra1 = SYSCTL_ONE,
> >> .extra2 = SYSCTL_INT_MAX,
> >> },
> >> +#endif
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_PRIO_LB
> >> + {
> >> + .procname = "sched_prio_load_balance_enabled",
> >> + .data = &sysctl_sched_prio_load_balance_enabled,
> >> + .maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
> >> + .mode = 0644,
> >> + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
> >> + .extra1 = SYSCTL_ZERO,
> >> + .extra2 = SYSCTL_ONE,
> >> + },
> >> #endif
> >> { }
> >> };
> >> --
> >> 2.27.0
> >>
> > .
Powered by blists - more mailing lists