linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server

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]

Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:37:03 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
 Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
 <bristot@...hat.com>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
 Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@...byteword.org>,
 Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
 David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] sched/deadline: Deferrable dl server

> On 3/20/2024 3:24 PM, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
>>> On 11/4/2023 6:59 AM, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
>>>> Among the motivations for the DL servers is the real-time throttling
>>>> mechanism. This mechanism works by throttling the rt_rq after
>>>> running for a long period without leaving space for fair tasks.
>>>>
>>>> The base dl server avoids this problem by boosting fair tasks instead
>>>> of throttling the rt_rq. The point is that it boosts without waiting
>>>> for potential starvation, causing some non-intuitive cases.
>>>>
>>>> For example, an IRQ dispatches two tasks on an idle system, a fair
>>>> and an RT. The DL server will be activated, running the fair task
>>>> before the RT one. This problem can be avoided by deferring the
>>>> dl server activation.
>>>>
>>>> By setting the zerolax option, the dl_server will dispatch an
>>>> SCHED_DEADLINE reservation with replenished runtime, but throttled.
>>>>
>>>> The dl_timer will be set for (period - runtime) ns from start time.
>>>> Thus boosting the fair rq on its 0-laxity time with respect to 
> 

Hi,
Upon reflection, might we simplify the solution by treating RT as a deadline
reservation as well?

The RT deadline reservation can have shorter deadline so it will be interrupted
less immediately by CFS due to EDF. Would that work, or was that already tried
and has other dragons?

If we could pull that off, then we do not need all the deferral/timer stuff and
could considering dropping this patch. Yes it is more code, but this 6th patch
is also big and non trivial.

Juri, Daniel, all, what do you think?

(On the other hand if we want to keep this patch as a first step, and
incrementally improve that is Ok, but  I believe we do need to make a decision..)

By the way, is there a still a slot in OSPM available to discuss these? If so
that would be great. I can put up some slides.

cheers,

 - Joel