On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 02:42:57PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> On 8/8/19 10:27 AM, Tim Chen wrote:
> > On 8/7/19 11:47 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 02:19:57PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> >>> +void account_core_idletime(struct task_struct *p, u64 exec)
> >>> +{
> >>> + const struct cpumask *smt_mask;
> >>> + struct rq *rq;
> >>> + bool force_idle, refill;
> >>> + int i, cpu;
> >>> +
> >>> + rq = task_rq(p);
> >>> + if (!sched_core_enabled(rq) || !p->core_cookie)
> >>> +         return;
> >>
> >> I don't see why return here for untagged task. Untagged task can also
> >> preempt tagged task and force a CPU thread enter idle state.
> >> Untagged is just another tag to me, unless we want to allow untagged
> >> task to coschedule with a tagged task.
> > 
> > You are right.  This needs to be fixed.
> > 
> 
> Here's the updated patchset, including Aaron's fix and also
> added accounting of force idle time by deadline and rt tasks.

I have two other small changes that I think are worth sending out.

The first simplify logic in pick_task() and the 2nd avoid task pick all
over again when max is preempted. I also refined the previous hack patch to
make schedule always happen only for root cfs rq. Please see below for
details, thanks.

patch1:

>From cea56db35fe9f393c357cdb1bdcb2ef9b56cfe97 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 21:21:25 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] sched/core: simplify pick_task()

No need to special case !cookie case in pick_task(), we just need to
make it possible to return idle in sched_core_find() for !cookie query.
And cookie_pick will always have less priority than class_pick, so
remove the redundant check of prio_less(cookie_pick, class_pick).

Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 19 ++++---------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 90655c9ad937..84fec9933b74 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -186,6 +186,8 @@ static struct task_struct *sched_core_find(struct rq *rq, 
unsigned long cookie)
         * The idle task always matches any cookie!
         */
        match = idle_sched_class.pick_task(rq);
+       if (!cookie)
+               goto out;
 
        while (node) {
                node_task = container_of(node, struct task_struct, core_node);
@@ -199,7 +201,7 @@ static struct task_struct *sched_core_find(struct rq *rq, 
unsigned long cookie)
                        node = node->rb_left;
                }
        }
-
+out:
        return match;
 }
 
@@ -3657,18 +3659,6 @@ pick_task(struct rq *rq, const struct sched_class 
*class, struct task_struct *ma
        if (!class_pick)
                return NULL;
 
-       if (!cookie) {
-               /*
-                * If class_pick is tagged, return it only if it has
-                * higher priority than max.
-                */
-               if (max && class_pick->core_cookie &&
-                   prio_less(class_pick, max))
-                       return idle_sched_class.pick_task(rq);
-
-               return class_pick;
-       }
-
        /*
         * If class_pick is idle or matches cookie, return early.
         */
@@ -3682,8 +3672,7 @@ pick_task(struct rq *rq, const struct sched_class *class, 
struct task_struct *ma
         * the core (so far) and it must be selected, otherwise we must go with
         * the cookie pick in order to satisfy the constraint.
         */
-       if (prio_less(cookie_pick, class_pick) &&
-           (!max || prio_less(max, class_pick)))
+       if (!max || prio_less(max, class_pick))
                return class_pick;
 
        return cookie_pick;
-- 
2.19.1.3.ge56e4f7

patch2:

>From 487950dc53a40d5c566602f775ce46a0bab7a412 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 14:48:01 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] sched/core: no need to pick again after max is preempted

When sibling's task preempts current max, there is no need to do the
pick all over again - the preempted cpu could just pick idle and done.

Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 84fec9933b74..e88583860abe 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3756,7 +3756,6 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, 
struct rq_flags *rf)
         * order.
         */
        for_each_class(class) {
-again:
                for_each_cpu_wrap(i, smt_mask, cpu) {
                        struct rq *rq_i = cpu_rq(i);
                        struct task_struct *p;
@@ -3828,10 +3827,10 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, 
struct rq_flags *rf)
                                                if (j == i)
                                                        continue;
 
-                                               cpu_rq(j)->core_pick = NULL;
+                                               cpu_rq(j)->core_pick = 
idle_sched_class.pick_task(cpu_rq(j));
                                        }
                                        occ = 1;
-                                       goto again;
+                                       goto out;
                                } else {
                                        /*
                                         * Once we select a task for a cpu, we
@@ -3846,7 +3845,7 @@ pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, 
struct rq_flags *rf)
                }
 next_class:;
        }
-
+out:
        rq->core->core_pick_seq = rq->core->core_task_seq;
        next = rq->core_pick;
        rq->core_sched_seq = rq->core->core_pick_seq;
-- 
2.19.1.3.ge56e4f7

patch3:

>From 2d396d99e0dd7157b0b4f7a037c8b84ed135ea56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:57:21 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: make tick based schedule always happen

When a hyperthread is forced idle and the other hyperthread has a single
CPU intensive task running, the running task can occupy the hyperthread
for a long time with no scheduling point and starve the other
hyperthread.

Fix this temporarily by always checking if the task has exceed its
timeslice and if so, for root cfs_rq, do a schedule.

Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <ziqian....@antfin.com>
---
 kernel/sched/fair.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 26d29126d6a5..b1f0defdad91 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4011,6 +4011,9 @@ check_preempt_tick(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct 
sched_entity *curr)
                return;
        }
 
+       if (cfs_rq->nr_running <= 1)
+               return;
+
        /*
         * Ensure that a task that missed wakeup preemption by a
         * narrow margin doesn't have to wait for a full slice.
@@ -4179,7 +4182,7 @@ entity_tick(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity 
*curr, int queued)
                return;
 #endif
 
-       if (cfs_rq->nr_running > 1)
+       if (cfs_rq->nr_running > 1 || cfs_rq->tg == &root_task_group)
                check_preempt_tick(cfs_rq, curr);
 }
 
-- 
2.19.1.3.ge56e4f7

Reply via email to