Message-ID: <c9026605-da1b-4631-b0dd-68ae0700ec87@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 09:42:46 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "Paul E. McKenney"
 <paulmck@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] sched: Move task_mm_cid_work to mm work_struct

On 2025-02-20 05:26, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> Currently, the task_mm_cid_work function is called in a task work
> triggered by a scheduler tick to frequently compact the mm_cids of each
> process. This can delay the execution of the corresponding thread for
> the entire duration of the function, negatively affecting the response
> in case of real time tasks. In practice, we observe task_mm_cid_work
> increasing the latency of 30-35us on a 128 cores system, this order of
> magnitude is meaningful under PREEMPT_RT.
> 
> Run the task_mm_cid_work in a new work_struct connected to the
> mm_struct rather than in the task context before returning to
> userspace.
> 
> This work_struct is initialised with the mm and disabled before freeing
> it. The queuing of the work happens while returning to userspace in
> __rseq_handle_notify_resume, maintaining the checks to avoid running
> more frequently than MM_CID_SCAN_DELAY.
> To make sure this happens predictably also on long running tasks, we
> trigger a call to __rseq_handle_notify_resume also from the scheduler
> tick (which in turn will also schedule the work item).
> 
> The main advantage of this change is that the function can be offloaded
> to a different CPU and even preempted by RT tasks.
> 
> Moreover, this new behaviour is more predictable with periodic tasks
> with short runtime, which may rarely run during a scheduler tick.
> Now, the work is always scheduled when the task returns to userspace.
> 
> The work is disabled during mmdrop, since the function cannot sleep in
> all kernel configurations, we cannot wait for possibly running work
> items to terminate. We make sure the mm is valid in case the task is
> terminating by reserving it with mmgrab/mmdrop, returning prematurely if
> we are really the last user while the work gets to run.
> This situation is unlikely since we don't schedule the work for exiting
> tasks, but we cannot rule it out.
> 
> Fixes: 223baf9d17f2 ("sched: Fix performance regression introduced by mm_cid")
> Signed-off-by: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
> ---
[...]
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 9aecd914ac691..363e51dd25175 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -5663,7 +5663,7 @@ void sched_tick(void)
>   		resched_latency = cpu_resched_latency(rq);
>   	calc_global_load_tick(rq);
>   	sched_core_tick(rq);
> -	task_tick_mm_cid(rq, donor);
> +	rseq_preempt(donor);
>   	scx_tick(rq);
>   
>   	rq_unlock(rq, &rf);

There is one tiny important detail worth discussing here: I wonder if
executing a __rseq_handle_notify_resume() on return to userspace on
every scheduler tick will cause noticeable performance degradation ?

I think we can mitigate the impact if we can quickly compute the amount
of contiguous unpreempted runtime since last preemption, then we could
use this as a way to only issue rseq_preempt() when there has been a
minimum amount of contiguous unpreempted execution. Otherwise the
rseq_preempt() already issued by preemption is enough.

I'm not entirely sure how to compute this "unpreempted contiguous
runtime" value within sched_tick() though, any ideas ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists