Message-ID: <20230129165603.cmcdbcydbado4yac@airbuntu>
Date:   Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:56:03 +0000
From:   Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, tj@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
        claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
        bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>, Rick Yiu <rickyiu@...gle.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: cpuset: Don't rebuild sched domains on
 suspend-resume

On 01/25/23 16:35, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 01/20/23 17:16, Waiman Long wrote:
> > 
> > On 1/20/23 14:48, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > Commit f9a25f776d78 ("cpusets: Rebuild root domain deadline accounting information")
> > > enabled rebuilding sched domain on cpuset and hotplug operations to
> > > correct deadline accounting.
> > > 
> > > Rebuilding sched domain is a slow operation and we see 10+ ms delay on
> > > suspend-resume because of that.
> > > 
> > > Since nothing is expected to change on suspend-resume operation; skip
> > > rebuilding the sched domains to regain the time lost.
> > > 
> > > Debugged-by: Rick Yiu <rickyiu@...gle.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@...alina.io>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > >      Changes in v2:
> > >      	* Remove redundant check in update_tasks_root_domain() (Thanks Waiman)
> > >      v1 link:
> > >      	https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221216233501.gh6m75e7s66dmjgo@airbuntu/
> > > 
> > >   kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c  | 3 +++
> > >   kernel/sched/deadline.c | 3 +++
> > >   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > index a29c0b13706b..9a45f083459c 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> > > @@ -1088,6 +1088,9 @@ static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
> > >   	lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
> > >   	lockdep_assert_held(&sched_domains_mutex);
> > > +	if (cpuhp_tasks_frozen)
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > >   	rcu_read_lock();
> > >   	/*
> > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > > index 0d97d54276cc..42c1143a3956 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > > @@ -2575,6 +2575,9 @@ void dl_clear_root_domain(struct root_domain *rd)
> > >   {
> > >   	unsigned long flags;
> > > +	if (cpuhp_tasks_frozen)
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > >   	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&rd->dl_bw.lock, flags);
> > >   	rd->dl_bw.total_bw = 0;
> > >   	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rd->dl_bw.lock, flags);
> > 
> > cpuhp_tasks_frozen is set when thaw_secondary_cpus() or
> > freeze_secondary_cpus() is called. I don't know the exact suspend/resume
> > calling sequences, will cpuhp_tasks_frozen be cleared at the end of resume
> > sequence? Maybe we should make sure that rebuild_root_domain() is called at
> > least once at the end of resume operation.
> 
> Very good questions. It made me look at the logic again and I realize now that
> the way force_build behaves is causing this issue.
> 
> I *think* we should just make the call rebuild_root_domains() only if
> cpus_updated in cpuset_hotplug_workfn().
> 
> cpuset_cpu_active() seems to be the source of force_rebuild in my case; which
> seems to be called only after the last cpu is back online (what you suggest).
> In this case we can end up with cpus_updated = false, but force_rebuild = true.
> 
> Now you added a couple of new users to force_rebuild in 4b842da276a8a; I'm
> trying to figure out what the conditions would be there. It seems we can have
> corner cases for cpus_update might not trigger correctly?
> 
> Could the below be a good cure?
> 
> AFAICT we must rebuild the root domains if something has changed in cpuset.
> Which should be captured by either having:
> 
> 	* cpus_updated = true
> 	* force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen
> 
> /me goes to test the patch

It works fine.

Can we assume cpus_udpated will always be false in suspend/resume cycle? I can
then check for (force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen) directly in
rebuild_root_domains().


Thanks!

--
Qais Yousef

> 
> --->8---
> 
> 	diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> 	index a29c0b13706b..363e4459559f 100644
> 	--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> 	+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
> 	@@ -1079,6 +1079,8 @@ static void update_tasks_root_domain(struct cpuset *cs)
> 		css_task_iter_end(&it);
> 	 }
> 
> 	+static bool need_rebuild_rd = true;
> 	+
> 	 static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
> 	 {
> 		struct cpuset *cs = NULL;
> 	@@ -1088,6 +1090,9 @@ static void rebuild_root_domains(void)
> 		lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
> 		lockdep_assert_held(&sched_domains_mutex);
> 
> 	+       if (!need_rebuild_rd)
> 	+               return;
> 	+
> 		rcu_read_lock();
> 
> 		/*
> 	@@ -3627,7 +3632,9 @@ static void cpuset_hotplug_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> 		/* rebuild sched domains if cpus_allowed has changed */
> 		if (cpus_updated || force_rebuild) {
> 			force_rebuild = false;
> 	+               need_rebuild_rd = cpus_updated || (force_rebuild && !cpuhp_tasks_frozen);
> 			rebuild_sched_domains();
> 	+               need_rebuild_rd = true;
> 		}
> 
> 		free_cpumasks(NULL, ptmp);
> 
> 
> --->8---
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> --
> Qais Yousef

Powered by blists - more mailing lists