[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230518134746.GB2860939@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 15:47:46 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] sched/nohz: Add HRTICK_BW for using cfs bandwidth
with nohz_full
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:20:38AM -0400, Phil Auld wrote:
> CFS bandwidth limits and NOHZ full don't play well together. Tasks
> can easily run well past their quotas before a remote tick does
> accounting. This leads to long, multi-period stalls before such
> tasks can run again. Use the hrtick mechanism to set a sched
> tick to fire at remaining_runtime in the future if we are on
> a nohz full cpu, if the task has quota and if we are likely to
> disable the tick (nr_running == 1). This allows for bandwidth
> accounting before tasks go too far over quota.
>
> A number of container workloads use a dynamic number of real
> nohz tasks but also have other work that is limited which ends
> up running on the "spare" nohz cpus. This is an artifact of
> having to specify nohz_full cpus at boot. Adding this hrtick
> resolves the issue of long stalls on these tasks.
>
> Add the sched_feat HRTICK_BW off by default to allow users to
> enable this only when needed.
OMG; so because NOHZ_FULL configuration sucks, we add hacks on?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists