[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cea46f88-6a4b-48c6-bbd7-033a3fc5d34d@bytedance.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 10:32:36 +0800
From: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@...edance.com>
To: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Sync se's load_avg with cfs_rq in
reweight_entity
在 2024/7/17 19:18, Chengming Zhou 写道:
> On 2024/7/16 23:08, Chuyi Zhou wrote:
>> In reweight_entity(), if !se->on_rq (e.g. when we are reweighting a
>> sleeping task), we should sync the load_avg of se to cfs_rq before
>> calling
>> dequeue_load_avg(). Otherwise, the load_avg of this se can be inaccurate.
>
> Good catch!
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@...edance.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/sched/fair.c | 6 ++++++
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 9057584ec06d..2807f6e72ad1 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -3782,6 +3782,8 @@ static void reweight_eevdf(struct sched_entity
>> *se, u64 avruntime,
>> se->deadline = avruntime + vslice;
>> }
>> +static inline void update_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct
>> sched_entity *se, int flags);
>> +
>> static void reweight_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct
>> sched_entity *se,
>> unsigned long weight)
>> {
>> @@ -3795,7 +3797,11 @@ static void reweight_entity(struct cfs_rq
>> *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
>> if (!curr)
>> __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
>> update_load_sub(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
>> + } else {
>> + /* Sync with the cfs_rq before removing our load_avg */
>> + update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, 0);
>
> I think it's suboptimal to update_load_avg() here unconditionally.
>
> Because reweight_entity() has two types of usages:
>
> 1. group se, which uses reweight_entity() in update_cfs_group(), which
> should already update_load_avg(), so should have no problem.
>
> 2. task se, which uses reweight_entity() in reweight_task(), which
> should be fixed for sleep task entity as you described above.
>
> So IMHO, we should only update_load_avg() or sync_entity_load_avg() in
> reweight_task(), right?
>
I will send another patch later.
Thanks for the review!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists