lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[RFC] High latency with core scheduling
Hello,
On ChromeOS, we see really high scheduling latency when there is a heavy
workload running outside and inside a CGroup. The load inside Cgroup is
tagged for core scheduling and happen to be vCPU threads. Because of this
various folks are complaining.

One of the issues we see is that the core rbtree is static when nothing in
the tree goes to sleep or wakes up. This can cause the same task in the core
rbtree to be repeatedly picked in pick_task().

The below diff seems to improve the situation, could you please take a look?
If it seems sane, we can go ahead and make it a formal patch to at least fix
one of the known issues.

The patch is simple, just remove the currently running task from the core rb
tree as its vruntime is not really static. Add it back on preemption.

note: This is against a 5.4 kernel, but the code is about the same and its RFC.
note: The issue does not seem to happen without CGroups involved so perhaps
something is wonky in cfs_prio_less() still. Peter?

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index c023a9a0c4ae..3c588ad05ab6 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ static inline void dump_scrb(struct rb_node *root, int lvl, char *buf, int size)
dump_scrb(root->rb_right, lvl+1, buf, size);
}

-static void sched_core_enqueue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
+void sched_core_enqueue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
struct rb_node *parent, **node;
struct task_struct *node_task;
@@ -212,6 +212,9 @@ static void sched_core_enqueue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
if (!p->core_cookie)
return;

+ if (sched_core_enqueued(p))
+ return;
+
node = &rq->core_tree.rb_node;
parent = *node;

@@ -232,7 +235,7 @@ static void sched_core_enqueue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
rb_insert_color(&p->core_node, &rq->core_tree);
}

-static void sched_core_dequeue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
+void sched_core_dequeue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
{
rq->core->core_task_seq++;

@@ -4745,6 +4748,18 @@ pick_task(struct rq *rq, const struct sched_class *class, struct task_struct *ma
return class_pick;

cookie_pick = sched_core_find(rq, cookie);
+
+ /*
+ * Currently running process might not be in the runqueue if fair class.
+ * If it is of the same cookie as cookie_pick and has more priority,
+ * then select it.
+ */
+ if (rq != this_rq() && !is_task_rq_idle(cookie_pick) && !is_task_rq_idle(rq->curr) &&
+ cookie_pick->core_cookie == rq->curr->core_cookie &&
+ prio_less(cookie_pick, rq->curr, in_fi)) {
+ cookie_pick = rq->curr;
+ }
+
/*
* If class > max && class > cookie, it is the highest priority task on
* the core (so far) and it must be selected, otherwise we must go with
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 86cc67dd38e9..820c5cf4ecc1 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1936,15 +1936,33 @@ struct sched_class {
#endif
};

+void sched_core_enqueue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p);
+void sched_core_dequeue(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p);
+
static inline void put_prev_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
{
WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->curr != prev);
prev->sched_class->put_prev_task(rq, prev);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_CORE
+ if (sched_core_enabled(rq) && READ_ONCE(prev->state) != TASK_DEAD && prev->core_cookie && prev->on_rq) {
+ sched_core_enqueue(rq, prev);
+ }
+#endif
}

static inline void set_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next)
{
next->sched_class->set_next_task(rq, next, false);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_CORE
+ /*
+ * This task is going to run next and its vruntime will change.
+ * Remove it from core rbtree so as to not confuse the ordering
+ * in the rbtree when its vrun changes.
+ */
+ if (sched_core_enabled(rq) && next->core_cookie && next->on_rq) {
+ sched_core_dequeue(rq, next);
+ }
+#endif
}

#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-17 01:43    [W:0.141 / U:2.592 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site