Pull scheduler fixes from Ingo Molnar:
"A fix for KVM's scheduler clock which (erroneously) was always marked
unstable, a fix for RT/DL load balancing, plus latency fixes"
* 'sched-urgent-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
sched/clock, x86/tsc: Rework the x86 'unstable' sched_clock() interface
sched/core: Fix pick_next_task() for RT,DL
sched/fair: Make select_idle_cpu() more aggressive
Kitsunyan reported desktop latency issues on his Celeron 887 because
of commit:
1b568f0aab ("sched/core: Optimize SCHED_SMT")
... even though his CPU doesn't do SMT.
The effect of running the SMT code on a !SMT part is basically a more
aggressive select_idle_cpu(). Removing the avg condition fixed things
for him.
I also know FB likes this test gone, even though other workloads like
having it.
For now, take it out by default, until we get a better idea.
Reported-by: kitsunyan <kitsunyan@inbox.ru>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
We are going to split <linux/sched/topology.h> out of <linux/sched.h>, which
will have to be picked up from other headers and a couple of .c files.
Create a trivial placeholder <linux/sched/topology.h> file that just
maps to <linux/sched.h> to make this patch obviously correct and
bisectable.
Include the new header in the files that are going to need it.
Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
So the original intention of tsk_cpus_allowed() was to 'future-proof'
the field - but it's pretty ineffectual at that, because half of
the code uses ->cpus_allowed directly ...
Also, the wrapper makes the code longer than the original expression!
So just get rid of it. This also shrinks <linux/sched.h> a bit.
Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
The update of the share of a cfs_rq is done when its load_avg is updated
but before the group_entity's load_avg has been updated for the past time
slot. This generates wrong load_avg accounting which can be significant
when small tasks are involved in the scheduling.
Let take the example of a task a that is dequeued of its task group A:
root
(cfs_rq)
\
(se)
A
(cfs_rq)
\
(se)
a
Task "a" was the only task in task group A which becomes idle when a is
dequeued.
We have the sequence:
- dequeue_entity a->se
- update_load_avg(a->se)
- dequeue_entity_load_avg(A->cfs_rq, a->se)
- update_cfs_shares(A->cfs_rq)
A->cfs_rq->load.weight == 0
A->se->load.weight is updated with the new share (0 in this case)
- dequeue_entity A->se
- update_load_avg(A->se) but its weight is now null so the last time
slot (up to a tick) will be accounted with a weight of 0 instead of
its real weight during the time slot. The last time slot will be
accounted as an idle one whereas it was a running one.
If the running time of task a is short enough that no tick happens when it
runs, all running time of group entity A->se will be accounted as idle
time.
Instead, we should update the share of a cfs_rq (in fact the weight of its
group entity) only after having updated the load_avg of the group_entity.
update_cfs_shares() now takes the sched_entity as a parameter instead of the
cfs_rq, and the weight of the group_entity is updated only once its load_avg
has been synced with current time.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: pjt@google.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1482335426-7664-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Add the update_rq_clock() call at the top of the callstack instead of
at the bottom where we find it missing, this to aid later effort to
minimize the number of update_rq_lock() calls.
WARNING: CPU: 30 PID: 194 at ../kernel/sched/sched.h:797 assert_clock_updated()
rq->clock_update_flags < RQCF_ACT_SKIP
Call Trace:
dump_stack()
__warn()
warn_slowpath_fmt()
assert_clock_updated.isra.63.part.64()
can_migrate_task()
load_balance()
pick_next_task_fair()
__schedule()
schedule()
worker_thread()
kthread()
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
find_idlest_group() only compares the runnable_load_avg when looking
for the least loaded group. But on fork intensive use case like
hackbench where tasks blocked quickly after the fork, this can lead to
selecting the same CPU instead of other CPUs, which have similar
runnable load but a lower load_avg.
When the runnable_load_avg of 2 CPUs are close, we now take into
account the amount of blocked load as a 2nd selection factor. There is
now 3 zones for the runnable_load of the rq:
- [0 .. (runnable_load - imbalance)]:
Select the new rq which has significantly less runnable_load
- [(runnable_load - imbalance) .. (runnable_load + imbalance)]:
The runnable loads are close so we use load_avg to chose
between the 2 rq
- [(runnable_load + imbalance) .. ULONG_MAX]:
Keep the current rq which has significantly less runnable_load
The scale factor that is currently used for comparing runnable_load,
doesn't work well with small value. As an example, the use of a
scaling factor fails as soon as this_runnable_load == 0 because we
always select local rq even if min_runnable_load is only 1, which
doesn't really make sense because they are just the same. So instead
of scaling factor, we use an absolute margin for runnable_load to
detect CPUs with similar runnable_load and we keep using scaling
factor for blocked load.
For use case like hackbench, this enable the scheduler to select
different CPUs during the fork sequence and to spread tasks across the
system.
Tests have been done on a Hikey board (ARM based octo cores) for
several kernel. The result below gives min, max, avg and stdev values
of 18 runs with each configuration.
The patches depend on the "no missing update_rq_clock()" work.
hackbench -P -g 1
ea86cb4b767dc603c902 v4.8 v4.8+patches
min 0.049 0.050 0.051 0,048
avg 0.057 0.057(0%) 0.057(0%) 0,055(+5%)
max 0.066 0.068 0.070 0,063
stdev +/-9% +/-9% +/-8% +/-9%
More performance numbers here:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161203214707.GI20785@codeblueprint.co.uk
Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Cc: kernellwp@gmail.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.comc
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1481216215-24651-3-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
During fork, the utilization of a task is init once the rq has been
selected because the current utilization level of the rq is used to
set the utilization of the fork task. As the task's utilization is
still 0 at this step of the fork sequence, it doesn't make sense to
look for some spare capacity that can fit the task's utilization.
Furthermore, I can see perf regressions for the test:
hackbench -P -g 1
because the least loaded policy is always bypassed and tasks are not
spread during fork.
With this patch and the fix below, we are back to same performances as
for v4.8. The fix below is only a temporary one used for the test
until a smarter solution is found because we can't simply remove the
test which is useful for others benchmarks
| @@ -5708,13 +5708,6 @@ static int select_idle_cpu(struct task_struct *p, struct sched_domain *sd, int t
|
| avg_cost = this_sd->avg_scan_cost;
|
| - /*
| - * Due to large variance we need a large fuzz factor; hackbench in
| - * particularly is sensitive here.
| - */
| - if ((avg_idle / 512) < avg_cost)
| - return -1;
| -
| time = local_clock();
|
| for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, sched_domain_span(sd), target, wrap) {
Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Acked-by: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Cc: kernellwp@gmail.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.comc
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1481216215-24651-2-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Fix the insertion of cfs_rq in rq->leaf_cfs_rq_list to ensure that a
child will always be called before its parent.
The hierarchical order in shares update list has been introduced by
commit:
67e86250f8 ("sched: Introduce hierarchal order on shares update list")
With the current implementation a child can be still put after its
parent.
Lets take the example of:
root
\
b
/\
c d*
|
e*
with root -> b -> c already enqueued but not d -> e so the
leaf_cfs_rq_list looks like: head -> c -> b -> root -> tail
The branch d -> e will be added the first time that they are enqueued,
starting with e then d.
When e is added, its parents is not already on the list so e is put at
the tail : head -> c -> b -> root -> e -> tail
Then, d is added at the head because its parent is already on the
list: head -> d -> c -> b -> root -> e -> tail
e is not placed at the right position and will be called the last
whereas it should be called at the beginning.
Because it follows the bottom-up enqueue sequence, we are sure that we
will finished to add either a cfs_rq without parent or a cfs_rq with a
parent that is already on the list. We can use this event to detect
when we have finished to add a new branch. For the others, whose
parents are not already added, we have to ensure that they will be
added after their children that have just been inserted the steps
before, and after any potential parents that are already in the list.
The easiest way is to put the cfs_rq just after the last inserted one
and to keep track of it untl the branch is fully added.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: bsegall@google.com
Cc: kernellwp@gmail.com
Cc: pjt@google.com
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1478598827-32372-3-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Linus Torvalds
Peter Zijlstra
Ingo Molnar
Dietmar Eggemann
Vincent Guittot
Matt Fleming
Tim Chen
Morten Rasmussen