Date:   Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:12:09 +0800
From:   Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>
To:     Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, corbet@....net, qyousef@...alina.io,
        chris.hyser@...cle.com, patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, pjt@...gle.com,
        pavel@....cz, 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, efault@....de, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: fix pick_eevdf to always find the correct se

On 9/30/23 8:09 AM, Benjamin Segall Wrote:
> The old pick_eevdf could fail to find the actual earliest eligible
> deadline when it descended to the right looking for min_deadline, but it
> turned out that that min_deadline wasn't actually eligible. In that case
> we need to go back and search through any left branches we skipped
> looking for the actual best _eligible_ min_deadline.
> 
> This is more expensive, but still O(log n), and at worst should only
> involve descending two branches of the rbtree.
> 
> I've run this through a userspace stress test (thank you
> tools/lib/rbtree.c), so hopefully this implementation doesn't miss any
> corner cases.
> 
> Fixes: 147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
> Signed-off-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
> ---
>   kernel/sched/fair.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 0c31cda0712f..77e9440b8ab3 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -864,18 +864,20 @@ struct sched_entity *__pick_first_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>    *
>    *  se->min_deadline = min(se->deadline, se->{left,right}->min_deadline)
>    *
>    * Which allows an EDF like search on (sub)trees.
>    */
> -static struct sched_entity *pick_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> +static struct sched_entity *__pick_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>   {
>   	struct rb_node *node = cfs_rq->tasks_timeline.rb_root.rb_node;
>   	struct sched_entity *curr = cfs_rq->curr;
>   	struct sched_entity *best = NULL;
> +	struct sched_entity *best_left = NULL;
>   
>   	if (curr && (!curr->on_rq || !entity_eligible(cfs_rq, curr)))
>   		curr = NULL;
> +	best = curr;
>   
>   	/*
>   	 * Once selected, run a task until it either becomes non-eligible or
>   	 * until it gets a new slice. See the HACK in set_next_entity().
>   	 */
> @@ -892,45 +894,87 @@ static struct sched_entity *pick_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>   			node = node->rb_left;
>   			continue;
>   		}
>   
>   		/*
> -		 * If this entity has an earlier deadline than the previous
> -		 * best, take this one. If it also has the earliest deadline
> -		 * of its subtree, we're done.
> +		 * Now we heap search eligible trees for the best (min_)deadline
>   		 */
> -		if (!best || deadline_gt(deadline, best, se)) {
> +		if (!best || deadline_gt(deadline, best, se))
>   			best = se;
> -			if (best->deadline == best->min_deadline)
> -				break;
> -		}
>   
>   		/*
> -		 * If the earlest deadline in this subtree is in the fully
> -		 * eligible left half of our space, go there.
> +		 * Every se in a left branch is eligible, keep track of the
> +		 * branch with the best min_deadline
>   		 */
> +		if (node->rb_left) {
> +			struct sched_entity *left = __node_2_se(node->rb_left);
> +
> +			if (!best_left || deadline_gt(min_deadline, best_left, left))
> +				best_left = left;
> +
> +			/*
> +			 * min_deadline is in the left branch. rb_left and all
> +			 * descendants are eligible, so immediately switch to the second
> +			 * loop.
> +			 */
> +			if (left->min_deadline == se->min_deadline)
> +				break;
> +		}
> +
> +		/* min_deadline is at this node, no need to look right */
> +		if (se->deadline == se->min_deadline)
> +			break;
> +
> +		/* else min_deadline is in the right branch. */
> +		node = node->rb_right;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We ran into an eligible node which is itself the best.
> +	 * (Or nr_running == 0 and both are NULL)
> +	 */
> +	if (!best_left || (s64)(best_left->min_deadline - best->deadline) > 0)
> +		return best;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Now best_left and all of its children are eligible, and we are just
> +	 * looking for deadline == min_deadline
> +	 */
> +	node = &best_left->run_node;
> +	while (node) {
> +		struct sched_entity *se = __node_2_se(node);
> +
> +		/* min_deadline is the current node */
> +		if (se->deadline == se->min_deadline)
> +			return se;

IMHO it would be better tiebreak on vruntime by moving this hunk to ..

> +
> +		/* min_deadline is in the left branch */
>   		if (node->rb_left &&
>   		    __node_2_se(node->rb_left)->min_deadline == se->min_deadline) {
>   			node = node->rb_left;
>   			continue;
>   		}

.. here, thoughts?

>   
> +		/* else min_deadline is in the right branch */
>   		node = node->rb_right;
>   	}
> +	return NULL;

Why not 'best'? Since ..

> +}
>   
> -	if (!best || (curr && deadline_gt(deadline, best, curr)))
> -		best = curr;
> +static struct sched_entity *pick_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> +{
> +	struct sched_entity *se = __pick_eevdf(cfs_rq);
>   
> -	if (unlikely(!best)) {
> +	if (!se) {
>   		struct sched_entity *left = __pick_first_entity(cfs_rq);

.. cfs_rq->curr isn't considered here.

>   		if (left) {
>   			pr_err("EEVDF scheduling fail, picking leftmost\n");
>   			return left;
>   		}
>   	}
>   
> -	return best;
> +	return se;
>   }
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG
>   struct sched_entity *__pick_last_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
>   {

The implementation of __pick_eevdf() now is quite complicated which
makes it really hard to maintain. I'm trying my best to refactor this
part, hopefully can do some help. Below is only for illustration, I
need to test more.

static struct sched_entity *__pick_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
{
	struct rb_node *node = cfs_rq->tasks_timeline.rb_root.rb_node;
	struct sched_entity *curr = cfs_rq->curr;
	struct sched_entity *best = NULL;
	struct sched_entity *cand = NULL;
	bool all_eligible = false;

	if (curr && (!curr->on_rq || !entity_eligible(cfs_rq, curr)))
		curr = NULL;

	/*
	 * Once selected, run a task until it either becomes non-eligible or
	 * until it gets a new slice. See the HACK in set_next_entity().
	 */
	if (sched_feat(RUN_TO_PARITY) && curr && curr->vlag == curr->deadline)
		return curr;

	while (node) {
		struct sched_entity *se = __node_2_se(node);

		/*
		 * If this entity is not eligible, try the left subtree.
		 */
		if (!all_eligible && !entity_eligible(cfs_rq, se)) {
			node = node->rb_left;
			continue;
		}

		if (node->rb_left) {
			struct sched_entity *left = __node_2_se(node->rb_left);

			BUG_ON(left->min_deadline < se->min_deadline);

			/* Tiebreak on vruntime */
			if (left->min_deadline == se->min_deadline) {
				node = node->rb_left;
				all_eligible = true;
				continue;
			}

			if (!all_eligible) {
				/*
				 * We're going to search right subtree and the one
				 * with min_deadline can be non-eligible, so record
				 * the left subtree as a candidate.
				 */
				if (!cand || deadline_gt(min_deadline, cand, left))
					cand = left;
			}
		}

		/* min_deadline is at this node, no need to look right */
		if (se->deadline == se->min_deadline) {
			best = se;
			break;
		}

		node = node->rb_right;

		if (!node && cand) {
			node = cand;
			all_eligible = true;
			cand = NULL;
		}
	}

	if (!best || (curr && deadline_gt(deadline, best, curr)))
		best = curr;

	return best;
}

Powered by blists - more mailing lists