linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/24] sched/uclamg: Handle delayed dequeue

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]

Message-ID: <83a20d85-de7a-4fe6-8cd8-5a96d822eb6b@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:28:01 +0100
From: Luis Machado <luis.machado@....com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@....com>, Peter Zijlstra
 <peterz@...radead.org>, mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
 dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
 mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kprateek.nayak@....com, wuyun.abel@...edance.com, youssefesmat@...omium.org,
 tglx@...utronix.de, efault@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/24] sched/uclamg: Handle delayed dequeue

On 8/22/24 10:53, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 at 11:22, Luis Machado <luis.machado@....com> wrote:
>>
>> On 8/22/24 09:19, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 at 15:34, Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@....com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for bombarding this thread in the last couple of days. I'm seeing
>>>> several issues in the latest tip/sched/core after these patches landed.
>>>>
>>>> What I'm now seeing seems to be an unbalanced call of util_est. First, I applied
>>>
>>> I also see a remaining util_est for idle rq because of an unbalance
>>> call of util_est_enqueue|dequeue
>>>
>>
>> I can confirm issues with the utilization values and frequencies being driven
>> seemingly incorrectly, in particular for little cores.
>>
>> What I'm seeing with the stock series is high utilization values for some tasks
>> and little cores having their frequencies maxed out for extended periods of
>> time. Sometimes for 5+ or 10+ seconds, which is excessive as the cores are mostly
>> idle. But whenever certain tasks get scheduled there, they have a very high util
>> level and so the frequency is kept at max.
>>
>> As a consequence this drives up power usage.
>>
>> I gave Hongyan's draft fix a try and observed a much more reasonable behavior for
>> the util numbers and frequencies being used for the little cores. With his fix,
>> I can also see lower energy use for my specific benchmark.
> 
> The main problem is that the util_est of a delayed dequeued task
> remains on the rq and keeps the rq utilization high and as a result
> the frequency higher than needed.
> 
> The below seems to works for me and keep sync the enqueue/dequeue of
> uti_test with the enqueue/dequeue of the task as if de dequeue was not
> delayed
> 
> Another interest is that we will not try to migrate a delayed dequeue
> sleeping task that doesn't actually impact the current load of the cpu
> and as a result will not help in the load balance. I haven't yet fully
> checked what would happen with hotplug

Thanks. Those are good points. Let me go and try your patch.