[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dddcd352-d3f3-4578-9f3a-1bf58d8fdb63@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 22:54:01 +0530
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri
Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Valentin Schneider
<vschneid@...hat.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall
<bsegall@...gle.com>, Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman
<mgorman@...e.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long
<longman@...hat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Paul E. McKenney"
<paulmck@...nel.org>, Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@....com>, Xuewen Yan
<xuewen.yan94@...il.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Daniel
Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
<kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v15 4/7] sched: Fix runtime accounting w/ split exec &
sched contexts
Hello John,
On 3/13/2025 3:41 AM, John Stultz wrote:
> The idea here is we want to charge the scheduler-context task's
> vruntime but charge the execution-context task's sum_exec_runtime.
>
> This way cputime accounting goes against the task actually running
> but vruntime accounting goes against the rq->donor task so we get
> proper fairness.
>
> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
> Cc: Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>
> Cc: Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@...gle.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Metin Kaya <Metin.Kaya@....com>
> Cc: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>
> Cc: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> Cc: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>
> Cc: kernel-team@...roid.com
> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index c798d27952431..f8ad3a44b3771 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -1129,22 +1129,33 @@ static void update_tg_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
>
> -static s64 update_curr_se(struct rq *rq, struct sched_entity *curr)
> +static s64 update_curr_se(struct rq *rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> {
> u64 now = rq_clock_task(rq);
> s64 delta_exec;
>
> - delta_exec = now - curr->exec_start;
> + delta_exec = now - se->exec_start;
> if (unlikely(delta_exec <= 0))
> return delta_exec;
>
> - curr->exec_start = now;
> - curr->sum_exec_runtime += delta_exec;
> + se->exec_start = now;
> + if (entity_is_task(se)) {
> + struct task_struct *running = rq->curr;
> + /*
> + * If se is a task, we account the time against the running
> + * task, as w/ proxy-exec they may not be the same.
> + */
> + running->se.exec_start = now;
> + running->se.sum_exec_runtime += delta_exec;
> + } else {
> + /* If not task, account the time against se */
> + se->sum_exec_runtime += delta_exec;
> + }
>
> if (schedstat_enabled()) {
> struct sched_statistics *stats;
>
> - stats = __schedstats_from_se(curr);
> + stats = __schedstats_from_se(se);
> __schedstat_set(stats->exec_max,
> max(delta_exec, stats->exec_max));
So I'm slightly confused here - For the case of proxy where
entity_is_task(), we charge the delta_exec to the running task's se but
then we go ahead and update the exec_max against the stats of the
donor's se? That seems odd.
Could we just replace the se with &rq->curr->se if entity_is_task()
returns true and keep the rest as is? The calculations will be same as
what it is above (except for the stats bit) and you'll not require
updating "exec_start" for both current task and proxy's se. Thoughts?
> }
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists