[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y42uH5fglluWYOm7@chenyu5-mobl1>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 16:38:55 +0800
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
CC: Honglei Wang <wanghonglei@...ichuxing.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"Tim Chen" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
"Juri Lelli" <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>,
Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>,
"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Dietmar Eggemann" <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.chen.surf@...il.com>,
Tianchen Ding <dtcccc@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] sched/fair: Introduce short duration task check
Hi Joel,
On 2022-12-03 at 10:35:46 -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 3, 2022, at 2:50 AM, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Honglei,
> >> On 2022-12-02 at 15:44:18 +0800, Honglei Wang wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 2022/12/1 16:44, Chen Yu wrote:
> >>> Introduce short-duration task checks, as there is requirement
> >>> to leverage this attribute for better task placement.
> >>>
> >>> There are several choices of metrics that could be used to
> >>> indicate if a task is a short-duration task.
> >>>
> >>> At first thought the (p->se.sum_exec_runtime / p->nvcsw)
> >>> could be used to measure the task duration. However, the
> >>> history long past was factored too heavily in such a formula.
> >>> Ideally, the old activity should decay and not affect
> >>> the current status too much.
> >>>
> >>> Although something based on PELT could be used, se.util_avg might
> >>> not be appropriate to describe the task duration:
> >>> 1. Task p1 and task p2 are doing frequent ping-pong scheduling on
> >>> one CPU, both p1 and p2 have a short duration, but the util_avg
> >>> can be up to 50%.
> >>> 2. Suppose a task lasting less than 4ms is regarded as a short task.
> >>> If task p3 runs for 6ms and sleeps for 32ms, p3 should not be a
> >>> short-duration task. However, PELT would decay p3's accumulated
> >>> running time from 6ms to 3ms, because 32ms is the half-life in PELT.
> >>> As a result, p3 would be incorrectly treated as a short task.
> >>>
> >>> It was found that there was once a similar feature to track the
> >>> duration of a task, which is in Commit ad4b78bbcbab ("sched: Add
> >>> new wakeup preemption mode: WAKEUP_RUNNING"). Unfortunately, it
> >>> was reverted because it was an experiment. So pick the patch up
> >>> again, by recording the average duration when a task voluntarily
> >>> switches out. Introduce SIS_SHORT to control this strategy.
> >>>
> >>> The threshold of short duration reuses sysctl_sched_min_granularity,
> >>> so it can be tuned by the user. Ideally there should be a dedicated
> >>> parameter for the threshold, but that might introduce complexity.
> >>>
> >>> Suggested-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
> >>> Suggested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> include/linux/sched.h | 4 ++++
> >>> kernel/sched/core.c | 2 ++
> >>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> >>> kernel/sched/features.h | 1 +
> >>> 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> index ffb6eb55cd13..64b7acb77a11 100644
> >>> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> >>> @@ -558,6 +558,10 @@ struct sched_entity {
> >>> u64 nr_migrations;
> >>> + u64 prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol;
> >>> + /* average duration of a task */
> >>> + u64 dur_avg;
> >>> +
> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> >>> int depth;
> >>> struct sched_entity *parent;
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> index daff72f00385..c5202f1be3f7 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> >>> @@ -4348,6 +4348,8 @@ static void __sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
> >>> p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime = 0;
> >>> p->se.nr_migrations = 0;
> >>> p->se.vruntime = 0;
> >>> + p->se.dur_avg = 0;
> >>> + p->se.prev_sum_exec_runtime_vol = 0;
> >>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p->se.group_node);
> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> index e4a0b8bd941c..a4b314b664f8 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> >>> @@ -6200,6 +6200,16 @@ static int wake_wide(struct task_struct *p)
> >>> return 1;
> >>> }
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * If a task switches in and then voluntarily relinquishes the
> >>> + * CPU quickly, it is regarded as a short duration task.
> >>> + */
> >>> +static inline int is_short_task(struct task_struct *p)
> >>> +{
> >>> + return sched_feat(SIS_SHORT) &&
> >>> + (p->se.dur_avg <= sysctl_sched_min_granularity);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>
> >> Hi Yu,
> >>
> >> I still have a bit concern about the sysctl_sched_min_granularity stuff..
> >> This grab can be set to different value which will impact the action of this
> >> patch and make things not totally under control.
>
> There are already ways to misconfigure sched sysctl to make bad/weird things happen.
>
> >> Not sure if we can add a new grab for this.. The test result shows good
> >> improvement for short task, and with this grab, admins will be able to
> >> custom the system base on their own 'short task' view.
> >>
> > It would be ideal to have a dedicated parameter to tweak this. For example,
> > something under /sys/kernel/debug/sched/, and initilized to sysctl_sched_min_granularity
> > by default.
>
> It would be nice to not have to introduce a new knob for this. IMO, min_granularity is reasonable.
>
OK, got it, thanks for the suggestion.
thanks,
Chenyu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists