[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <073e5bf0-99c4-4dc5-8894-5442e2d53a34@126.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:04:33 +0800
From: Honglei Wang <jameshongleiwang@....com>
To: "mingyang.cui" <mingyang.cui@...izon.ai>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org, tkjos@...gle.com, pjt@...gle.com,
quentin.perret@....com, Patrick.Bellasi@....com, Chris.Redpath@....com,
Morten.Rasmussen@....com, joaodias@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Fix forked task check in vruntime_normalized
On 2024/3/28 14:27, mingyang.cui wrote:
> When rt_mutex_setprio changes a task's scheduling class to RT,
> sometimes the task's vruntime is not updated correctly upon
> return to the fair class.
> Specifically, the following is being observed:
> - task has just been created and running for a short time
> - task sleep while still in the fair class
> - task is boosted to RT via rt_mutex_setprio, which changes
> the task to RT and calls check_class_changed.
> - check_class_changed leads to detach_task_cfs_rq, at which point
> the vruntime_normalized check sees that the task's sum_exec_runtime
> is zero, which results in skipping the subtraction of the
> rq's min_vruntime from the task's vruntime
Hi Mingyang,
Did you do the test on the latest tree? vruntime_normalized was removed
by e8f331bcc2 (sched/smp: Use lag to simplify cross-runqueue placement).
Thanks,
Honglei
> - later, when the prio is deboosted and the task is moved back
> to the fair class, the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to
> the task's vruntime, even though it wasn't subtracted earlier.
>
> Since the task's vruntime is about double that of other tasks in cfs_rq,
> the task to be unable to run for a long time when there are continuous
> runnable tasks in cfs_rq.
>
> The immediate result is inflation of the task's vruntime, giving
> it lower priority (starving it if there's enough available work).
> The longer-term effect is inflation of all vruntimes because the
> task's vruntime becomes the rq's min_vruntime when the higher
> priority tasks go idle. That leads to a vicious cycle, where
> the vruntime inflation repeatedly doubled.
>
> The root cause of the problem is that the vruntime_normalized made a
> misjudgment. Since the sum_exec_runtime of some tasks that were just
> created and run for a short time is zero, the vruntime_normalized
> mistakenly thinks that they are tasks that have just been forked.
> Therefore, sum_exec_runtime is not subtracted from the vruntime of the
> task.
>
> So, we fix this bug by adding a check condition for newly forked task.
>
> Signed-off-by: mingyang.cui <mingyang.cui@...izon.ai>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 73a89fbd81be..3d0c14f3731f 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -11112,7 +11112,7 @@ static inline bool vruntime_normalized(struct task_struct *p)
> * - A task which has been woken up by try_to_wake_up() and
> * waiting for actually being woken up by sched_ttwu_pending().
> */
> - if (!se->sum_exec_runtime ||
> + if (!se->sum_exec_runtime && p->state == TASK_NEW ||
> (p->state == TASK_WAKING && p->sched_remote_wakeup))
> return true;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists