From: Luca Abeni <luca.ab...@santannapisa.it>

Now that the inactive timer can be armed to fire at the 0-lag time,
it is possible to use inactive_task_timer() to update the total
-deadline utilization (dl_b->total_bw) at the correct time, fixing
dl_overflow() and __setparam_dl().

Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni <luca.ab...@santannapisa.it>
Tested-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bris...@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c     | 38 ++++++++++++++------------------------
 kernel/sched/deadline.c | 23 +++++++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index bf0b0b9..20c62e7 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2487,9 +2487,6 @@ static inline int dl_bw_cpus(int i)
  * allocated bandwidth to reflect the new situation.
  *
  * This function is called while holding p's rq->lock.
- *
- * XXX we should delay bw change until the task's 0-lag point, see
- * __setparam_dl().
  */
 static int dl_overflow(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
                       const struct sched_attr *attr)
@@ -2514,16 +2511,29 @@ static int dl_overflow(struct task_struct *p, int 
policy,
        cpus = dl_bw_cpus(task_cpu(p));
        if (dl_policy(policy) && !task_has_dl_policy(p) &&
            !__dl_overflow(dl_b, cpus, 0, new_bw)) {
+               if (hrtimer_active(&p->dl.inactive_timer))
+                       __dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
                __dl_add(dl_b, new_bw);
                err = 0;
        } else if (dl_policy(policy) && task_has_dl_policy(p) &&
                   !__dl_overflow(dl_b, cpus, p->dl.dl_bw, new_bw)) {
+               /*
+                * XXX this is slightly incorrect: when the task
+                * utilization decreases, we should delay the total
+                * utilization change until the task's 0-lag point.
+                * But this would require to set the task's "inactive
+                * timer" when the task is not inactive.
+                */
                __dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
                __dl_add(dl_b, new_bw);
                dl_change_utilization(p, new_bw);
                err = 0;
        } else if (!dl_policy(policy) && task_has_dl_policy(p)) {
-               __dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
+               /*
+                * Do not decrease the total deadline utilization here,
+                * switched_from_dl() will take care to do it at the correct
+                * (0-lag) time.
+                */
                err = 0;
        }
        raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
@@ -3964,26 +3974,6 @@ __setparam_dl(struct task_struct *p, const struct 
sched_attr *attr)
        dl_se->dl_period = attr->sched_period ?: dl_se->dl_deadline;
        dl_se->flags = attr->sched_flags;
        dl_se->dl_bw = to_ratio(dl_se->dl_period, dl_se->dl_runtime);
-
-       /*
-        * Changing the parameters of a task is 'tricky' and we're not doing
-        * the correct thing -- also see task_dead_dl() and switched_from_dl().
-        *
-        * What we SHOULD do is delay the bandwidth release until the 0-lag
-        * point. This would include retaining the task_struct until that time
-        * and change dl_overflow() to not immediately decrement the current
-        * amount.
-        *
-        * Instead we retain the current runtime/deadline and let the new
-        * parameters take effect after the current reservation period lapses.
-        * This is safe (albeit pessimistic) because the 0-lag point is always
-        * before the current scheduling deadline.
-        *
-        * We can still have temporary overloads because we do not delay the
-        * change in bandwidth until that time; so admission control is
-        * not on the safe side. It does however guarantee tasks will never
-        * consume more than promised.
-        */
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
index 86aed82..238713e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c
@@ -121,8 +121,14 @@ static void task_non_contending(struct task_struct *p)
        if (zerolag_time < 0) {
                if (dl_task(p))
                        sub_running_bw(dl_se->dl_bw, dl_rq);
-               if (!dl_task(p) || p->state == TASK_DEAD)
+               if (!dl_task(p) || p->state == TASK_DEAD) {
+                       struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
+
+                       raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
+                       __dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
                        __dl_clear_params(p);
+                       raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
+               }
 
                return;
        }
@@ -948,10 +954,16 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart inactive_task_timer(struct 
hrtimer *timer)
        rq = task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
 
        if (!dl_task(p) || p->state == TASK_DEAD) {
+               struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
+
                if (p->state == TASK_DEAD && dl_se->dl_non_contending) {
                        sub_running_bw(p->dl.dl_bw, dl_rq_of_se(&p->dl));
                        dl_se->dl_non_contending = 0;
                }
+
+               raw_spin_lock(&dl_b->lock);
+               __dl_clear(dl_b, p->dl.dl_bw);
+               raw_spin_unlock(&dl_b->lock);
                __dl_clear_params(p);
 
                goto unlock;
@@ -1473,15 +1485,6 @@ static void task_fork_dl(struct task_struct *p)
 
 static void task_dead_dl(struct task_struct *p)
 {
-       struct dl_bw *dl_b = dl_bw_of(task_cpu(p));
-
-       /*
-        * Since we are TASK_DEAD we won't slip out of the domain!
-        */
-       raw_spin_lock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
-       /* XXX we should retain the bw until 0-lag */
-       dl_b->total_bw -= p->dl.dl_bw;
-       raw_spin_unlock_irq(&dl_b->lock);
 }
 
 static void set_curr_task_dl(struct rq *rq)
-- 
2.7.4

Reply via email to