Change the type and name of task_struct::state. Drop the volatile and
shrink it to an 'unsigned int'. Rename it in order to find all uses
such that we can use READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE as appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210611082838.550736351@infradead.org
This commit in sched/urgent moved the cfs_rq_is_decayed() function:
a7b359fc6a37: ("sched/fair: Correctly insert cfs_rq's to list on unthrottle")
and this fresh commit in sched/core modified it in the old location:
9e077b52d86a: ("sched/pelt: Check that *_avg are null when *_sum are")
Merge the two variants.
Conflicts:
kernel/sched/fair.c
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This is a partial forward-port of Peter Ziljstra's work first posted
at:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180530142236.667774973@infradead.org/
Currently select_idle_cpu()'s proportional scheme uses the average idle
time *for when we are idle*, that is temporally challenged. When a CPU
is not at all idle, we'll happily continue using whatever value we did
see when the CPU goes idle. To fix this, introduce a separate average
idle and age it (the existing value still makes sense for things like
new-idle balancing, which happens when we do go idle).
The overall goal is to not spend more time scanning for idle CPUs than
we're idle for. Otherwise we're inhibiting work. This means that we need to
consider the cost over all the wake-ups between consecutive idle periods.
To track this, the scan cost is subtracted from the estimated average
idle time.
The impact of this patch is related to workloads that have domains that
are fully busy or overloaded. Without the patch, the scan depth may be
too high because a CPU is not reaching idle.
Due to the nature of the patch, this is a regression magnet. It
potentially wins when domains are almost fully busy or overloaded --
at that point searches are likely to fail but idle is not being aged
as CPUs are active so search depth is too large and useless. It will
potentially show regressions when there are idle CPUs and a deep search is
beneficial. This tbench result on a 2-socket broadwell machine partially
illustates the problem
5.13.0-rc2 5.13.0-rc2
vanilla sched-avgidle-v1r5
Hmean 1 445.02 ( 0.00%) 451.36 * 1.42%*
Hmean 2 830.69 ( 0.00%) 846.03 * 1.85%*
Hmean 4 1350.80 ( 0.00%) 1505.56 * 11.46%*
Hmean 8 2888.88 ( 0.00%) 2586.40 * -10.47%*
Hmean 16 5248.18 ( 0.00%) 5305.26 * 1.09%*
Hmean 32 8914.03 ( 0.00%) 9191.35 * 3.11%*
Hmean 64 10663.10 ( 0.00%) 10192.65 * -4.41%*
Hmean 128 18043.89 ( 0.00%) 18478.92 * 2.41%*
Hmean 256 16530.89 ( 0.00%) 17637.16 * 6.69%*
Hmean 320 16451.13 ( 0.00%) 17270.97 * 4.98%*
Note that 8 was a regression point where a deeper search would have helped
but it gains for high thread counts when searches are useless. Hackbench
is a more extreme example although not perfect as the tasks idle rapidly
hackbench-process-pipes
5.13.0-rc2 5.13.0-rc2
vanilla sched-avgidle-v1r5
Amean 1 0.3950 ( 0.00%) 0.3887 ( 1.60%)
Amean 4 0.9450 ( 0.00%) 0.9677 ( -2.40%)
Amean 7 1.4737 ( 0.00%) 1.4890 ( -1.04%)
Amean 12 2.3507 ( 0.00%) 2.3360 * 0.62%*
Amean 21 4.0807 ( 0.00%) 4.0993 * -0.46%*
Amean 30 5.6820 ( 0.00%) 5.7510 * -1.21%*
Amean 48 8.7913 ( 0.00%) 8.7383 ( 0.60%)
Amean 79 14.3880 ( 0.00%) 13.9343 * 3.15%*
Amean 110 21.2233 ( 0.00%) 19.4263 * 8.47%*
Amean 141 28.2930 ( 0.00%) 25.1003 * 11.28%*
Amean 172 34.7570 ( 0.00%) 30.7527 * 11.52%*
Amean 203 41.0083 ( 0.00%) 36.4267 * 11.17%*
Amean 234 47.7133 ( 0.00%) 42.0623 * 11.84%*
Amean 265 53.0353 ( 0.00%) 47.7720 * 9.92%*
Amean 296 60.0170 ( 0.00%) 53.4273 * 10.98%*
Stddev 1 0.0052 ( 0.00%) 0.0025 ( 51.57%)
Stddev 4 0.0357 ( 0.00%) 0.0370 ( -3.75%)
Stddev 7 0.0190 ( 0.00%) 0.0298 ( -56.64%)
Stddev 12 0.0064 ( 0.00%) 0.0095 ( -48.38%)
Stddev 21 0.0065 ( 0.00%) 0.0097 ( -49.28%)
Stddev 30 0.0185 ( 0.00%) 0.0295 ( -59.54%)
Stddev 48 0.0559 ( 0.00%) 0.0168 ( 69.92%)
Stddev 79 0.1559 ( 0.00%) 0.0278 ( 82.17%)
Stddev 110 1.1728 ( 0.00%) 0.0532 ( 95.47%)
Stddev 141 0.7867 ( 0.00%) 0.0968 ( 87.69%)
Stddev 172 1.0255 ( 0.00%) 0.0420 ( 95.91%)
Stddev 203 0.8106 ( 0.00%) 0.1384 ( 82.92%)
Stddev 234 1.1949 ( 0.00%) 0.1328 ( 88.89%)
Stddev 265 0.9231 ( 0.00%) 0.0820 ( 91.11%)
Stddev 296 1.0456 ( 0.00%) 0.1327 ( 87.31%)
Again, higher thread counts benefit and the standard deviation
shows that results are also a lot more stable when the idle
time is aged.
The patch potentially matters when a socket was multiple LLCs as the
maximum search depth is lower. However, some of the test results were
suspiciously good (e.g. specjbb2005 gaining 50% on a Zen1 machine) and
other results were not dramatically different to other mcahines.
Given the nature of the patch, Peter's full series is not being forward
ported as each part should stand on its own. Preferably they would be
merged at different times to reduce the risk of false bisections.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210615111611.GH30378@techsingularity.net
Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to predict the decisions made by
SchedUtil. The map_util_freq() exists to do that.
There are corner cases where the max allowed frequency might be reduced
(due to thermal). SchedUtil as a CPUFreq governor, is aware of that
but EAS is not. This patch aims to address it.
SchedUtil stores the maximum allowed frequency in
'sugov_policy::next_freq' field. EAS has to predict that value, which is
the real used frequency. That value is made after a call to
cpufreq_driver_resolve_freq() which clamps to the CPUFreq policy limits.
In the existing code EAS is not able to predict that real frequency.
This leads to energy estimation errors.
To avoid wrong energy estimation in EAS (due to frequency miss prediction)
make sure that the step which calculates Performance Domain frequency,
is also aware of the allowed CPU capacity.
Furthermore, modify map_util_freq() to not extend the frequency value.
Instead, use map_util_perf() to extend the util value in both places:
SchedUtil and EAS, but for EAS clamp it to max allowed CPU capacity.
In the end, we achieve the same desirable behavior for both subsystems
and alignment in regards to the real CPU frequency.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> (For the schedutil part)
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210614191238.23224-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com
Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) needs to be able to predict the frequency
requests made by the SchedUtil governor to properly estimate energy used
in the future. It has to take into account CPUs utilization and forecast
Performance Domain (PD) frequency. There is a corner case when the max
allowed frequency might be reduced due to thermal. SchedUtil is aware of
that reduced frequency, so it should be taken into account also in EAS
estimations.
SchedUtil, as a CPUFreq governor, knows the maximum allowed frequency of
a CPU, thanks to cpufreq_driver_resolve_freq() and internal clamping
to 'policy::max'. SchedUtil is responsible to respect that upper limit
while setting the frequency through CPUFreq drivers. This effective
frequency is stored internally in 'sugov_policy::next_freq' and EAS has
to predict that value.
In the existing code the raw value of arch_scale_cpu_capacity() is used
for clamping the returned CPU utilization from effective_cpu_util().
This patch fixes issue with too big single CPU utilization, by introducing
clamping to the allowed CPU capacity. The allowed CPU capacity is a CPU
capacity reduced by thermal pressure raw value.
Thanks to knowledge about allowed CPU capacity, we don't get too big value
for a single CPU utilization, which is then added to the util sum. The
util sum is used as a source of information for estimating whole PD energy.
To avoid wrong energy estimation in EAS (due to capped frequency), make
sure that the calculation of util sum is aware of allowed CPU capacity.
This thermal pressure might be visible in scenarios where the CPUs are not
heavily loaded, but some other component (like GPU) drastically reduced
available power budget and increased the SoC temperature. Thus, we still
use EAS for task placement and CPUs are not over-utilized.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210614191128.22735-1-lukasz.luba@arm.com
In case the _avg delta is 0 there is no need to update se's _avg
(level n) nor cfs_rq's _avg (level n-1). These values stay the same.
Since cfs_rq's _avg isn't changed, i.e. no load is propagated down,
cfs_rq's _sum should stay the same as well.
So bail out after se's _sum has been updated.
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210601083616.804229-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Check that we never break the rule that pelt's avg values are null if
pelt's sum are.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Acked-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210601155328.19487-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Fix an issue where fairness is decreased since cfs_rq's can end up not
being decayed properly. For two sibling control groups with the same
priority, this can often lead to a load ratio of 99/1 (!!).
This happens because when a cfs_rq is throttled, all the descendant
cfs_rq's will be removed from the leaf list. When they initial cfs_rq
is unthrottled, it will currently only re add descendant cfs_rq's if
they have one or more entities enqueued. This is not a perfect
heuristic.
Instead, we insert all cfs_rq's that contain one or more enqueued
entities, or it its load is not completely decayed.
Can often lead to situations like this for equally weighted control
groups:
$ ps u -C stress
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 10009 88.8 0.0 3676 100 pts/1 R+ 11:04 0:13 stress --cpu 1
root 10023 3.0 0.0 3676 104 pts/1 R+ 11:04 0:00 stress --cpu 1
Fixes: 31bc6aeaab ("sched/fair: Optimize update_blocked_averages()")
[vingo: !SMP build fix]
Signed-off-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210612112815.61678-1-odin@uged.al
The util_est internal UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED flag which is used to prevent
unnecessary util_est updates uses the LSB of util_est.enqueued. It is
exposed via _task_util_est() (and task_util_est()).
Commit 92a801e5d5 ("sched/fair: Mask UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED usages")
mentions that the LSB is lost for util_est resolution but
find_energy_efficient_cpu() checks if task_util_est() returns 0 to
return prev_cpu early.
_task_util_est() returns the max value of util_est.ewma and
util_est.enqueued or'ed w/ UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED.
So task_util_est() returning the max of task_util() and
_task_util_est() will never return 0 under the default
SCHED_FEAT(UTIL_EST, true).
To fix this use the MSB of util_est.enqueued instead and keep the flag
util_est internal, i.e. don't export it via _task_util_est().
The maximal possible util_avg value for a task is 1024 so the MSB of
'unsigned int util_est.enqueued' isn't used to store a util value.
As a caveat the code behind the util_est_se trace point has to filter
UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED to see the real util_est.enqueued value which should
be easy to do.
This also fixes an issue report by Xuewen Yan that util_est_update()
only used UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED for the subtrahend of the equation:
last_enqueued_diff = ue.enqueued - (task_util() | UTIL_AVG_UNCHANGED)
Fixes: b89997aa88 sched/pelt: Fix task util_est update filtering
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@unisoc.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210602145808.1562603-1-dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Rounding in PELT calculation happening when entities are attached/detached
of a cfs_rq can result into situations where util/runnable_avg is not null
but util/runnable_sum is. This is normally not possible so we need to
ensure that util/runnable_sum stays synced with util/runnable_avg.
detach_entity_load_avg() is the last place where we don't sync
util/runnable_sum with util/runnbale_avg when moving some sched_entities
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210601085832.12626-1-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
When using something other than 8 spaces per tab, this ascii art
makes not sense, and the reader might end up wondering what this
advanced equation "is".
Signed-off-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210518125202.78658-4-odin@uged.al
During the update of fair blocked load (__update_blocked_fair()), we
update the contribution of the cfs in tg->load_avg if cfs_rq's pelt
has decayed. Nevertheless, the pelt values of a cfs_rq could have
been recently updated while propagating the change of a child. In this
case, cfs_rq's pelt will not decayed because it has already been
updated and we don't update tg->load_avg.
__update_blocked_fair
...
for_each_leaf_cfs_rq_safe: child cfs_rq
update cfs_rq_load_avg() for child cfs_rq
...
update_load_avg(cfs_rq_of(se), se, 0)
...
update cfs_rq_load_avg() for parent cfs_rq
-propagation of child's load makes parent cfs_rq->load_sum
becoming null
-UPDATE_TG is not set so it doesn't update parent
cfs_rq->tg_load_avg_contrib
..
for_each_leaf_cfs_rq_safe: parent cfs_rq
update cfs_rq_load_avg() for parent cfs_rq
- nothing to do because parent cfs_rq has already been updated
recently so cfs_rq->tg_load_avg_contrib is not updated
...
parent cfs_rq is decayed
list_del_leaf_cfs_rq parent cfs_rq
- but it still contibutes to tg->load_avg
we must set UPDATE_TG flags when propagting pending load to the parent
Fixes: 039ae8bcf7 ("sched/fair: Fix O(nr_cgroups) in the load balancing path")
Reported-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210527122916.27683-3-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
when removing a cfs_rq from the list we only check _sum value so we must
ensure that _avg and _sum stay synced so load_sum can't be null whereas
load_avg is not after propagating load in the cgroup hierarchy.
Use load_avg to compute load_sum similarly to what is done for util_sum
and runnable_sum.
Fixes: 0e2d2aaaae ("sched/fair: Rewrite PELT migration propagation")
Reported-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210527122916.27683-2-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
- Don't migrate if there is a cookie mismatch
Load balance tries to move task from busiest CPU to the
destination CPU. When core scheduling is enabled, if the
task's cookie does not match with the destination CPU's
core cookie, this task may be skipped by this CPU. This
mitigates the forced idle time on the destination CPU.
- Select cookie matched idle CPU
In the fast path of task wakeup, select the first cookie matched
idle CPU instead of the first idle CPU.
- Find cookie matched idlest CPU
In the slow path of task wakeup, find the idlest CPU whose core
cookie matches with task's cookie
Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.860083871@infradead.org
During force-idle, we end up doing cross-cpu comparison of vruntimes
during pick_next_task. If we simply compare (vruntime-min_vruntime)
across CPUs, and if the CPUs only have 1 task each, we will always
end up comparing 0 with 0 and pick just one of the tasks all the time.
This starves the task that was not picked. To fix this, take a snapshot
of the min_vruntime when entering force idle and use it for comparison.
This min_vruntime snapshot will only be used for cross-CPU vruntime
comparison, and nothing else.
A note about the min_vruntime snapshot and force idling:
During selection:
When we're not fi, we need to update snapshot.
when we're fi and we were not fi, we must update snapshot.
When we're fi and we were already fi, we must not update snapshot.
Which gives:
fib fi update
0 0 1
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 0
Where:
fi: force-idled now
fib: force-idled before
So the min_vruntime snapshot needs to be updated when: !(fib && fi).
Also, the cfs_prio_less() function needs to be aware of whether the
core is in force idle or not, since it will be use this information to
know whether to advance a cfs_rq's min_vruntime_fi in the hierarchy.
So pass this information along via pick_task() -> prio_less().
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.738542617@infradead.org
If there is only one long running local task and the sibling is
forced idle, it might not get a chance to run until a schedule
event happens on any cpu in the core.
So we check for this condition during a tick to see if a sibling
is starved and then give it a chance to schedule.
Signed-off-by: Vineeth Pillai <viremana@linux.microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.617407840@infradead.org
Introduce task_struct::core_cookie as an opaque identifier for core
scheduling. When enabled; core scheduling will only allow matching
task to be on the core; where idle matches everything.
When task_struct::core_cookie is set (and core scheduling is enabled)
these tasks are indexed in a second RB-tree, first on cookie value
then on scheduling function, such that matching task selection always
finds the most elegible match.
NOTE: *shudder* at the overhead...
NOTE: *sigh*, a 3rd copy of the scheduling function; the alternative
is per class tracking of cookies and that just duplicates a lot of
stuff for no raisin (the 2nd copy lives in the rt-mutex PI code).
[Joel: folded fixes]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.496975854@infradead.org
Because sched_class::pick_next_task() also implies
sched_class::set_next_task() (and possibly put_prev_task() and
newidle_balance) it is not state invariant. This makes it unsuitable
for remote task selection.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
[Vineeth: folded fixes]
Signed-off-by: Vineeth Remanan Pillai <viremana@linux.microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.437092775@infradead.org
rq_lockp() includes a static_branch(), which is asm-goto, which is
asm volatile which defeats regular CSE. This means that:
if (!static_branch(&foo))
return simple;
if (static_branch(&foo) && cond)
return complex;
Doesn't fold and we get horrible code. Introduce __rq_lockp() without
the static_branch() on.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.316696988@infradead.org
In preparation of playing games with rq->lock, abstract the thing
using an accessor.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.136465446@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Don Hiatt <dhiatt@digitalocean.com>
Tested-by: Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422123308.015639083@infradead.org
find_energy_efficient_cpu() (feec()) searches the best energy CPU
to place a task on. To do so, compute_energy() estimates the energy
impact of placing the task on a CPU, based on CPU and task utilization
signals.
Utilization signals can be concurrently updated while evaluating a
performance domain (pd). In some cases, this leads to having a
'negative delta', i.e. placing the task in the pd is seen as an
energy gain. Thus, any further energy comparison is biased.
In case of a 'negative delta', return prev_cpu since:
1. a 'negative delta' happens in less than 0.5% of feec() calls,
on a Juno with 6 CPUs (4 little, 2 big)
2. it is unlikely to have two consecutive 'negative delta' for
a task, so if the first call fails, feec() will correctly
place the task in the next feec() call
3. EAS current behavior tends to select prev_cpu if the task
doesn't raise the OPP of its current pd. prev_cpu is EAS's
generic decision
4. prev_cpu should be preferred to returning an error code.
In the latter case, select_idle_sibling() would do the placement,
selecting a big (and not energy efficient) CPU. As 3., the task
would potentially reside on the big CPU for a long time
Reported-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@unisoc.com>
Suggested-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@unisoc.com>
Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <Pierre.Gondois@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210504090743.9688-3-Pierre.Gondois@arm.com
find_energy_efficient_cpu() searches the best energy CPU
to place a task on. To do so, the energy of each performance domain
(pd) is computed w/ and w/o the task placed on it.
The energy of a pd w/o the task (base_energy_pd) is computed prior
knowing whether a CPU is available in the pd.
Move the base_energy_pd computation after looping through the CPUs
of a pd and only compute it if at least one CPU is available.
Suggested-by: Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan@unisoc.com>
Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <Pierre.Gondois@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210504090743.9688-2-Pierre.Gondois@arm.com
The try_to_wake_up function has an optimization where it can queue
a task for wakeup on its previous CPU, if the task is still in the
middle of going to sleep inside schedule().
Once schedule() re-enables IRQs, the task will be woken up with an
IPI, and placed back on the runqueue.
If we have such a wakeup pending, there is no need to search other
CPUs for runnable tasks. Just skip (or bail out early from) newidle
balancing, and run the just woken up task.
For a memcache like workload test, this reduces total CPU use by
about 2%, proportionally split between user and system time,
and p99 and p95 application response time by 10% on average.
The schedstats run_delay number shows a similar improvement.
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210422130236.0bb353df@imladris.surriel.com
In commit:
9fe1f127b9 ("sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu()")
in select_idle_cpu(), we check if an idle core is present in the LLC
of the target CPU via the flag "has_idle_cores". We look for the idle
core in select_idle_cores(). If select_idle_cores() isn't able to find
an idle core/CPU, we need to unset the has_idle_cores flag in the LLC
of the target to prevent other CPUs from going down this route.
However, the current code is unsetting it in the LLC of the current
CPU instead of the target CPU. This patch fixes this issue.
Fixes: 9fe1f127b9 ("sched/fair: Merge select_idle_core/cpu()")
Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1620746169-13996-1-git-send-email-ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com
This fixes an issue where old load on a cfs_rq is not properly decayed,
resulting in strange behavior where fairness can decrease drastically.
Real workloads with equally weighted control groups have ended up
getting a respective 99% and 1%(!!) of cpu time.
When an idle task is attached to a cfs_rq by attaching a pid to a cgroup,
the old load of the task is attached to the new cfs_rq and sched_entity by
attach_entity_cfs_rq. If the task is then moved to another cpu (and
therefore cfs_rq) before being enqueued/woken up, the load will be moved
to cfs_rq->removed from the sched_entity. Such a move will happen when
enforcing a cpuset on the task (eg. via a cgroup) that force it to move.
The load will however not be removed from the task_group itself, making
it look like there is a constant load on that cfs_rq. This causes the
vruntime of tasks on other sibling cfs_rq's to increase faster than they
are supposed to; causing severe fairness issues. If no other task is
started on the given cfs_rq, and due to the cpuset it would not happen,
this load would never be properly unloaded. With this patch the load
will be properly removed inside update_blocked_averages. This also
applies to tasks moved to the fair scheduling class and moved to another
cpu, and this path will also fix that. For fork, the entity is queued
right away, so this problem does not affect that.
This applies to cases where the new process is the first in the cfs_rq,
issue introduced 3d30544f02 ("sched/fair: Apply more PELT fixes"), and
when there has previously been load on the cgroup but the cgroup was
removed from the leaflist due to having null PELT load, indroduced
in 039ae8bcf7 ("sched/fair: Fix O(nr_cgroups) in the load balancing
path").
For a simple cgroup hierarchy (as seen below) with two equally weighted
groups, that in theory should get 50/50 of cpu time each, it often leads
to a load of 60/40 or 70/30.
parent/
cg-1/
cpu.weight: 100
cpuset.cpus: 1
cg-2/
cpu.weight: 100
cpuset.cpus: 1
If the hierarchy is deeper (as seen below), while keeping cg-1 and cg-2
equally weighted, they should still get a 50/50 balance of cpu time.
This however sometimes results in a balance of 10/90 or 1/99(!!) between
the task groups.
$ ps u -C stress
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 18568 1.1 0.0 3684 100 pts/12 R+ 13:36 0:00 stress --cpu 1
root 18580 99.3 0.0 3684 100 pts/12 R+ 13:36 0:09 stress --cpu 1
parent/
cg-1/
cpu.weight: 100
sub-group/
cpu.weight: 1
cpuset.cpus: 1
cg-2/
cpu.weight: 100
sub-group/
cpu.weight: 10000
cpuset.cpus: 1
This can be reproduced by attaching an idle process to a cgroup and
moving it to a given cpuset before it wakes up. The issue is evident in
many (if not most) container runtimes, and has been reproduced
with both crun and runc (and therefore docker and all its "derivatives"),
and with both cgroup v1 and v2.
Fixes: 3d30544f02 ("sched/fair: Apply more PELT fixes")
Fixes: 039ae8bcf7 ("sched/fair: Fix O(nr_cgroups) in the load balancing path")
Signed-off-by: Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210501141950.23622-2-odin@uged.al
The kthread_is_per_cpu() construct relies on only being called on
PF_KTHREAD tasks (per the WARN in to_kthread). This gives rise to the
following usage pattern:
if ((p->flags & PF_KTHREAD) && kthread_is_per_cpu(p))
However, as reported by syzcaller, this is broken. The scenario is:
CPU0 CPU1 (running p)
(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD) // true
begin_new_exec()
me->flags &= ~(PF_KTHREAD|...);
kthread_is_per_cpu(p)
to_kthread(p)
WARN(!(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD) <-- *SPLAT*
Introduce __to_kthread() that omits the WARN and is sure to check both
values.
Use this to remove the problematic pattern for kthread_is_per_cpu()
and fix a number of other kthread_*() functions that have similar
issues but are currently not used in ways that would expose the
problem.
Notably kthread_func() is only ever called on 'current', while
kthread_probe_data() is only used for PF_WQ_WORKER, which implies the
task is from kthread_create*().
Fixes: ac687e6e8c ("kthread: Extract KTHREAD_IS_PER_CPU")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <Valentin.Schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YH6WJc825C4P0FCK@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
When !CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON we get this new GCC warning:
kernel/sched/fair.c:8398:13: warning: ‘update_nohz_stats’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
Move update_nohz_stats() to an already existing CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON #ifdef
block.
Beyond fixing the GCC warning, this also simplifies the update_nohz_stats() function.
[ mingo: Rewrote the changelog. ]
Fixes: 0826530de3 ("sched/fair: Remove update of blocked load from newidle_balance")
Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210329144029.29200-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com
The current sched_slice() seems to have issues; there's two possible
things that could be improved:
- the 'nr_running' used for __sched_period() is daft when cgroups are
considered. Using the RQ wide h_nr_running seems like a much more
consistent number.
- (esp) cgroups can slice it real fine, which makes for easy
over-scheduling, ensure min_gran is what the name says.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210412102001.611897312@infradead.org
Stop polluting sysctl with undocumented knobs that really are debug
only, move them all to /debug/sched/ along with the existing
/debug/sched_* files that already exist.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Tested-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210412102001.287610138@infradead.org
During load-balance, groups classified as group_misfit_task are filtered
out if they do not pass
group_smaller_max_cpu_capacity(<candidate group>, <local group>);
which itself employs fits_capacity() to compare the sgc->max_capacity of
both groups.
Due to the underlying margin, fits_capacity(X, 1024) will return false for
any X > 819. Tough luck, the capacity_orig's on e.g. the Pixel 4 are
{261, 871, 1024}. If a CPU-bound task ends up on one of those "medium"
CPUs, misfit migration will never intentionally upmigrate it to a CPU of
higher capacity due to the aforementioned margin.
One may argue the 20% margin of fits_capacity() is excessive in the advent
of counter-enhanced load tracking (APERF/MPERF, AMUs), but one point here
is that fits_capacity() is meant to compare a utilization value to a
capacity value, whereas here it is being used to compare two capacity
values. As CPU capacity and task utilization have different dynamics, a
sensible approach here would be to add a new helper dedicated to comparing
CPU capacities.
Also note that comparing capacity extrema of local and source sched_group's
doesn't make much sense when at the day of the day the imbalance will be
pulled by a known env->dst_cpu, whose capacity can be anywhere within the
local group's capacity extrema.
While at it, replace group_smaller_{min, max}_cpu_capacity() with
comparisons of the source group's min/max capacity and the destination
CPU's capacity.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210407220628.3798191-4-valentin.schneider@arm.com
When triggering an active load balance, sd->nr_balance_failed is set to
such a value that any further can_migrate_task() using said sd will ignore
the output of task_hot().
This behaviour makes sense, as active load balance intentionally preempts a
rq's running task to migrate it right away, but this asynchronous write is
a bit shoddy, as the stopper thread might run active_load_balance_cpu_stop
before the sd->nr_balance_failed write either becomes visible to the
stopper's CPU or even happens on the CPU that appended the stopper work.
Add a struct lb_env flag to denote active balancing, and use it in
can_migrate_task(). Remove the sd->nr_balance_failed write that served the
same purpose. Cleanup the LBF_DST_PINNED active balance special case.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210407220628.3798191-3-valentin.schneider@arm.com
During load balance, LBF_SOME_PINNED will be set if any candidate task
cannot be detached due to CPU affinity constraints. This can result in
setting env->sd->parent->sgc->group_imbalance, which can lead to a group
being classified as group_imbalanced (rather than any of the other, lower
group_type) when balancing at a higher level.
In workloads involving a single task per CPU, LBF_SOME_PINNED can often be
set due to per-CPU kthreads being the only other runnable tasks on any
given rq. This results in changing the group classification during
load-balance at higher levels when in reality there is nothing that can be
done for this affinity constraint: per-CPU kthreads, as the name implies,
don't get to move around (modulo hotplug shenanigans).
It's not as clear for userspace tasks - a task could be in an N-CPU cpuset
with N-1 offline CPUs, making it an "accidental" per-CPU task rather than
an intended one. KTHREAD_IS_PER_CPU gives us an indisputable signal which
we can leverage here to not set LBF_SOME_PINNED.
Note that the aforementioned classification to group_imbalance (when
nothing can be done) is especially problematic on big.LITTLE systems, which
have a topology the likes of:
DIE [ ]
MC [ ][ ]
0 1 2 3
L L B B
arch_scale_cpu_capacity(L) < arch_scale_cpu_capacity(B)
Here, setting LBF_SOME_PINNED due to a per-CPU kthread when balancing at MC
level on CPUs [0-1] will subsequently prevent CPUs [2-3] from classifying
the [0-1] group as group_misfit_task when balancing at DIE level. Thus, if
CPUs [0-1] are running CPU-bound (misfit) tasks, ill-timed per-CPU kthreads
can significantly delay the upgmigration of said misfit tasks. Systems
relying on ASYM_PACKING are likely to face similar issues.
Signed-off-by: Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>
[Use kthread_is_per_cpu() rather than p->nr_cpus_allowed]
[Reword changelog]
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210407220628.3798191-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com
Mel Gorman did some nice work in 9fe1f127b9 ("sched/fair: Merge
select_idle_core/cpu()"), resulting in the kernel being more efficient
at finding an idle CPU, and in tasks spending less time waiting to be
run, both according to the schedstats run_delay numbers, and according
to measured application latencies. Yay.
The flip side of this is that we see more task migrations (about 30%
more), higher cache misses, higher memory bandwidth utilization, and
higher CPU use, for the same number of requests/second.
This is most pronounced on a memcache type workload, which saw a
consistent 1-3% increase in total CPU use on the system, due to those
increased task migrations leading to higher L2 cache miss numbers, and
higher memory utilization. The exclusive L3 cache on Skylake does us
no favors there.
On our web serving workload, that effect is usually negligible.
It appears that the increased number of CPU migrations is generally a
good thing, since it leads to lower cpu_delay numbers, reflecting the
fact that tasks get to run faster. However, the reduced locality and
the corresponding increase in L2 cache misses hurts a little.
The patch below appears to fix the regression, while keeping the
benefit of the lower cpu_delay numbers, by reintroducing
select_idle_smt with a twist: when a socket has no idle cores, check
to see if the sibling of "prev" is idle, before searching all the
other CPUs.
This fixes both the occasional 9% regression on the web serving
workload, and the continuous 2% CPU use regression on the memcache
type workload.
With Mel's patches and this patch together, task migrations are still
high, but L2 cache misses, memory bandwidth, and CPU time used are
back down to what they were before. The p95 and p99 response times for
the memcache type application improve by about 10% over what they were
before Mel's patches got merged.
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210326151932.2c187840@imladris.surriel.com
A long-tail load balance cost is observed on the newly idle path,
this is caused by a race window between the first nr_running check
of the busiest runqueue and its nr_running recheck in detach_tasks.
Before the busiest runqueue is locked, the tasks on the busiest
runqueue could be pulled by other CPUs and nr_running of the busiest
runqueu becomes 1 or even 0 if the running task becomes idle, this
causes detach_tasks breaks with LBF_ALL_PINNED flag set, and triggers
load_balance redo at the same sched_domain level.
In order to find the new busiest sched_group and CPU, load balance will
recompute and update the various load statistics, which eventually leads
to the long-tail load balance cost.
This patch clears LBF_ALL_PINNED flag for this race condition, and hence
reduces the long-tail cost of newly idle balance.
Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1614154549-116078-1-git-send-email-aubrey.li@intel.com
update_idle_core() is only done for the case of sched_smt_present.
but test_idle_cores() is done for all machines even those without
SMT.
This can contribute to up 8%+ hackbench performance loss on a
machine like kunpeng 920 which has no SMT. This patch removes the
redundant test_idle_cores() for !SMT machines.
Hackbench is ran with -g {2..14}, for each g it is ran 10 times to get
an average.
$ numactl -N 0 hackbench -p -T -l 20000 -g $1
The below is the result of hackbench w/ and w/o this patch:
g= 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
w/o: 1.8151 3.8499 5.5142 7.2491 9.0340 10.7345 12.0929
w/ : 1.8428 3.7436 5.4501 6.9522 8.2882 9.9535 11.3367
+4.1% +8.3% +7.3% +6.3%
Signed-off-by: Barry Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210320221432.924-1-song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com
Fix ~42 single-word typos in scheduler code comments.
We have accumulated a few fun ones over the years. :-)
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
A significant portion of __calc_delta() time is spent in the loop
shifting a u64 by 32 bits. Use `fls` instead of iterating.
This is ~7x faster on benchmarks.
The generic `fls` implementation (`generic_fls`) is still ~4x faster
than the loop.
Architectures that have a better implementation will make use of it. For
example, on x86 we get an additional factor 2 in speed without dedicated
implementation.
On GCC, the asm versions of `fls` are about the same speed as the
builtin. On Clang, the versions that use fls are more than twice as
slow as the builtin. This is because the way the `fls` function is
written, clang puts the value in memory:
https://godbolt.org/z/EfMbYe. This bug is filed at
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?idI406.
```
name cpu/op
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_loop> 9.57ms Â=B112%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_generic_fls> 2.36ms Â=B113%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_asm_fls> 2.45ms Â=B113%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_asm_fls_nomem> 1.66ms Â=B112%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_asm_fls64> 2.46ms Â=B113%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_asm_fls64_nomem> 1.34ms Â=B115%
BM_Calc<__calc_delta_builtin> 1.32ms Â=B111%
```
Signed-off-by: Clement Courbet <courbet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210303224653.2579656-1-joshdon@google.com
Being called for each dequeue, util_est reduces the number of its updates
by filtering out when the EWMA signal is different from the task util_avg
by less than 1%. It is a problem for a sudden util_avg ramp-up. Due to the
decay from a previous high util_avg, EWMA might now be close enough to
the new util_avg. No update would then happen while it would leave
ue.enqueued with an out-of-date value.
Taking into consideration the two util_est members, EWMA and enqueued for
the filtering, ensures, for both, an up-to-date value.
This is for now an issue only for the trace probe that might return the
stale value. Functional-wise, it isn't a problem, as the value is always
accessed through max(enqueued, ewma).
This problem has been observed using LISA's UtilConvergence:test_means on
the sd845c board.
No regression observed with Hackbench on sd845c and Perf-bench sched pipe
on hikey/hikey960.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210225165820.1377125-1-vincent.donnefort@arm.com
Syzbot reported a handful of occurrences where an sd->nr_balance_failed can
grow to much higher values than one would expect.
A successful load_balance() resets it to 0; a failed one increments
it. Once it gets to sd->cache_nice_tries + 3, this *should* trigger an
active balance, which will either set it to sd->cache_nice_tries+1 or reset
it to 0. However, in case the to-be-active-balanced task is not allowed to
run on env->dst_cpu, then the increment is done without any further
modification.
This could then be repeated ad nauseam, and would explain the absurdly high
values reported by syzbot (86, 149). VincentG noted there is value in
letting sd->cache_nice_tries grow, so the shift itself should be
fixed. That means preventing:
"""
If the value of the right operand is negative or is greater than or equal
to the width of the promoted left operand, the behavior is undefined.
"""
Thus we need to cap the shift exponent to
BITS_PER_TYPE(typeof(lefthand)) - 1.
I had a look around for other similar cases via coccinelle:
@expr@
position pos;
expression E1;
expression E2;
@@
(
E1 >> E2@pos
|
E1 >> E2@pos
)
@cst depends on expr@
position pos;
expression expr.E1;
constant cst;
@@
(
E1 >> cst@pos
|
E1 << cst@pos
)
@script:python depends on !cst@
pos << expr.pos;
exp << expr.E2;
@@
# Dirty hack to ignore constexpr
if exp.upper() != exp:
coccilib.report.print_report(pos[0], "Possible UB shift here")
The only other match in kernel/sched is rq_clock_thermal() which employs
sched_thermal_decay_shift, and that exponent is already capped to 10, so
that one is fine.
Fixes: 5a7f555904 ("sched/fair: Relax constraint on task's load during load balance")
Reported-by: syzbot+d7581744d5fd27c9fbe1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: http://lore.kernel.org/r/000000000000ffac1205b9a2112f@google.com
The sub_positive local version is saving an explicit load-store and is
enough for the cpu_util_next() usage.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210225083612.1113823-3-vincent.donnefort@arm.com
find_energy_efficient_cpu() (feec()) computes for each perf_domain (pd) an
energy delta as follows:
feec(task)
for_each_pd
base_energy = compute_energy(task, -1, pd)
-> for_each_cpu(pd)
-> cpu_util_next(cpu, task, -1)
energy_delta = compute_energy(task, dst_cpu, pd)
-> for_each_cpu(pd)
-> cpu_util_next(cpu, task, dst_cpu)
energy_delta -= base_energy
Then it picks the best CPU as being the one that minimizes energy_delta.
cpu_util_next() estimates the CPU utilization that would happen if the
task was placed on dst_cpu as follows:
max(cpu_util + task_util, cpu_util_est + _task_util_est)
The task contribution to the energy delta can then be either:
(1) _task_util_est, on a mostly idle CPU, where cpu_util is close to 0
and _task_util_est > cpu_util.
(2) task_util, on a mostly busy CPU, where cpu_util > _task_util_est.
(cpu_util_est doesn't appear here. It is 0 when a CPU is idle and
otherwise must be small enough so that feec() takes the CPU as a
potential target for the task placement)
This is problematic for feec(), as cpu_util_next() might give an unfair
advantage to a CPU which is mostly busy (2) compared to one which is
mostly idle (1). _task_util_est being always bigger than task_util in
feec() (as the task is waking up), the task contribution to the energy
might look smaller on certain CPUs (2) and this breaks the energy
comparison.
This issue is, moreover, not sporadic. By starving idle CPUs, it keeps
their cpu_util < _task_util_est (1) while others will maintain cpu_util >
_task_util_est (2).
Fix this problem by always using max(task_util, _task_util_est) as a task
contribution to the energy (ENERGY_UTIL). The new estimated CPU
utilization for the energy would then be:
max(cpu_util, cpu_util_est) + max(task_util, _task_util_est)
compute_energy() still needs to know which OPP would be selected if the
task would be migrated in the perf_domain (FREQUENCY_UTIL). Hence,
cpu_util_next() is still used to estimate the maximum util within the pd.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort <vincent.donnefort@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210225083612.1113823-2-vincent.donnefort@arm.com
Start to update last_blocked_load_update_tick to reduce the possibility
of another cpu starting the update one more time
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-8-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Instead of waking up a random and already idle CPU, we can take advantage
of this_cpu being about to enter idle to run the ILB and update the
blocked load.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-7-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Reorder the tests and skip useless ones when no load balance has been
performed and rq lock has not been released.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-6-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Remove the specific case for handling this_cpu outside for_each_cpu() loop
when running ILB. Instead we use for_each_cpu_wrap() and start with the
next cpu after this_cpu so we will continue to finish with this_cpu.
update_nohz_stats() is now used for this_cpu too and will prevents
unnecessary update. We don't need a special case for handling the update of
nohz.next_balance for this_cpu anymore because it is now handled by the
loop like others.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-5-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
idle load balance is the only user of update_nohz_stats and doesn't use
force parameter. Remove it
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-4-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
The return of _nohz_idle_balance() is not used anymore so we can remove
it
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210224133007.28644-3-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Peter Zijlstra