linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support

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: <20221103142732.m5ibwkuymvhcdxkn@airbuntu>
Date:   Thu, 3 Nov 2022 14:27:32 +0000
From:   Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
To:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
        mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, parth@...ux.ibm.com,
        qais.yousef@....com, chris.hyser@...cle.com,
        patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, David.Laight@...lab.com,
        pjt@...gle.com, pavel@....cz, tj@...nel.org, qperret@...gle.com,
        tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, joshdon@...gle.com, timj@....org,
        kprateek.nayak@....com, yu.c.chen@...el.com,
        youssefesmat@...omium.org, joel@...lfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support

On 11/03/22 09:46, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 at 20:28, Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/28/22 11:34, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > Task can set its latency priority with sched_setattr(), which is then used
> > > to set the latency offset of its sched_enity, but sched group entities
> > > still have the default latency offset value.
> > >
> > > Add a latency.nice field in cpu cgroup controller to set the latency
> > > priority of the group similarly to sched_setattr(). The latency priority
> > > is then used to set the offset of the sched_entities of the group.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst |  8 ++++
> > >  kernel/sched/core.c                     | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  kernel/sched/fair.c                     | 33 ++++++++++++++++
> > >  kernel/sched/sched.h                    |  4 ++
> > >  4 files changed, 97 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
> > > index be4a77baf784..d8ae7e411f9c 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
> > > @@ -1095,6 +1095,14 @@ All time durations are in microseconds.
> > >          values similar to the sched_setattr(2). This maximum utilization
> > >          value is used to clamp the task specific maximum utilization clamp.
> > >
> > > +  cpu.latency.nice
> > > +     A read-write single value file which exists on non-root
> > > +     cgroups.  The default is "0".
> > > +
> > > +     The nice value is in the range [-20, 19].
> > > +
> > > +     This interface file allows reading and setting latency using the
> > > +     same values used by sched_setattr(2).
> >
> > I'm still not sure about this [1].
> 
> I'm still not sure about what you are trying to say here ...
> 
> This is about setting a latency nice prio to a group level.
> 
> >
> > In some scenarios we'd like to get the effective latency_nice of the task. How
> > will the task inherit the cgroup value or be impacted by it?
> >
> > For example if there are tasks that belong to a latency sensitive cgroup; and
> > I'd like to skip some searches in EAS to improve that latency sensitivity - how
> > would I extract this info in EAS path given these tasks are using default
> > latency_nice value? And if should happen if their latency_nice is set to
> > something else other than default?
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221012160734.hrkb5jcjdq7r23pr@wubuntu/
> 
> Hmm so you are speaking about something that is not part of the patch.
> Let focus on the patchset for now

I am focusing on this patchset. Isn't this an essential part of the design?
Once the interface is out we can't change it. As it stands, I can't see how it
can be used to replace prefer_idle in cgroup as used in Android. I can't see
how this could happen if we don't define how the task will inherit the cgroup
value. If we can, mind elaborating how please?


Thanks

--
Qais Yousef