linux-stable.git/kernel/sched/deadline.c, branch linux-3.14.y

sched, dl: Convert switched_{from, to}_dl() / prio_changed_dl() to balance callbacks

2016-03-03T23:06:47+00:00

commit 9916e214998a4a363b152b637245e5c958067350 upstream.

Remove the direct {push,pull} balancing operations from
switched_{from,to}_dl() / prio_changed_dl() and use the balance
callback queue.

Again, err on the side of too many reschedules; since too few is a
hard bug while too many is just annoying.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: ktkhai@parallels.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: juri.lelli@gmail.com
Cc: pang.xunlei@linaro.org
Cc: oleg@redhat.com
Cc: wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150611124742.968262663@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched,dl: Remove return value from pull_dl_task()

2016-03-03T23:06:47+00:00

commit 0ea60c2054fc3b0c3eb68ac4f6884f3ee78d9925 upstream.

In order to be able to use pull_dl_task() from a callback, we need to
do away with the return value.

Since the return value indicates if we should reschedule, do this
inside the function. Since not all callers currently do this, this can
increase the number of reschedules due rt balancing.

Too many reschedules is not a correctness issues, too few are.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: ktkhai@parallels.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: juri.lelli@gmail.com
Cc: pang.xunlei@linaro.org
Cc: oleg@redhat.com
Cc: wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150611124742.859398977@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched: Replace post_schedule with a balance callback list

2016-03-03T23:06:47+00:00

commit e3fca9e7cbfb72694a21c886fcdf9f059cfded9c upstream.

Generalize the post_schedule() stuff into a balance callback list.
This allows us to more easily use it outside of schedule() and cross
sched_class.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Cc: ktkhai@parallels.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: juri.lelli@gmail.com
Cc: pang.xunlei@linaro.org
Cc: oleg@redhat.com
Cc: wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150611124742.424032725@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/deadline: Avoid double-accounting in case of missed deadlines

2015-01-16T14:59:33+00:00

commit 269ad8015a6b2bb1cf9e684da4921eb6fa0a0c88 upstream.

The dl_runtime_exceeded() function is supposed to ckeck if
a SCHED_DEADLINE task must be throttled, by checking if its
current runtime is <= 0. However, it also checks if the
scheduling deadline has been missed (the current time is
larger than the current scheduling deadline), further
decreasing the runtime if this happens.
This "double accounting" is wrong:

- In case of partitioned scheduling (or single CPU), this
  happens if task_tick_dl() has been called later than expected
  (due to small HZ values). In this case, the current runtime is
  also negative, and replenish_dl_entity() can take care of the
  deadline miss by recharging the current runtime to a value smaller
  than dl_runtime

- In case of global scheduling on multiple CPUs, scheduling
  deadlines can be missed even if the task did not consume more
  runtime than expected, hence penalizing the task is wrong

This patch fix this problem by throttling a SCHED_DEADLINE task
only when its runtime becomes negative, and not modifying the runtime

Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Acked-by: Juri Lelli 
Cc: Dario Faggioli 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1418813432-20797-3-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/deadline: Fix migration of SCHED_DEADLINE tasks

2015-01-16T14:59:33+00:00

commit 6a503c3be937d275113b702e0421e5b0720abe8a upstream.

According to global EDF, tasks should be migrated between runqueues
without checking if their scheduling deadlines and runtimes are valid.
However, SCHED_DEADLINE currently performs such a check:
a migration happens doing:

	deactivate_task(rq, next_task, 0);
	set_task_cpu(next_task, later_rq->cpu);
	activate_task(later_rq, next_task, 0);

which ends up calling dequeue_task_dl(), setting the new CPU, and then
calling enqueue_task_dl().

enqueue_task_dl() then calls enqueue_dl_entity(), which calls
update_dl_entity(), which can modify scheduling deadline and runtime,
breaking global EDF scheduling.

As a result, some of the properties of global EDF are not respected:
for example, a taskset {(30, 80), (40, 80), (120, 170)} scheduled on
two cores can have unbounded response times for the third task even
if 30/80+40/80+120/170 = 1.5809 < 2

This can be fixed by invoking update_dl_entity() only in case of
wakeup, or if this is a new SCHED_DEADLINE task.

Signed-off-by: Luca Abeni 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) 
Acked-by: Juri Lelli 
Cc: Dario Faggioli 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1418813432-20797-2-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

printk: rename printk_sched to printk_deferred

2014-08-07T21:52:37+00:00

commit aac74dc495456412c4130a1167ce4beb6c1f0b38 upstream.

After learning we'll need some sort of deferred printk functionality in
the timekeeping core, Peter suggested we rename the printk_sched function
so it can be reused by needed subsystems.

This only changes the function name. No logic changes.

Signed-off-by: John Stultz 
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt 
Cc: Jan Kara 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Jiri Bohac 
Cc: Thomas Gleixner 
Cc: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/dl: Fix race in dl_task_timer()

2014-06-11T18:54:11+00:00

commit 0f397f2c90ce68821ee864c2c53baafe78de765d upstream.

Throttled task is still on rq, and it may be moved to other cpu
if user is playing with sched_setaffinity(). Therefore, unlocked
task_rq() access makes the race.

Juri Lelli reports he got this race when dl_bandwidth_enabled()
was not set.

Other thing, pointed by Peter Zijlstra:

   "Now I suppose the problem can still actually happen when
    you change the root domain and trigger a effective affinity
    change that way".

To fix that we do the same as made in __task_rq_lock(). We do not
use __task_rq_lock() itself, because it has a useful lockdep check,
which is not correct in case of dl_task_timer(). We do not need
pi_lock locked here. This case is an exception (PeterZ):

   "The only reason we don't strictly need ->pi_lock now is because
    we're guaranteed to have p->state == TASK_RUNNING here and are
    thus free of ttwu races".

Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Linus Torvalds 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/3056991400578422@web14g.yandex.ru
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

sched/deadline: Prevent rt_time growth to infinity

2014-02-27T11:29:41+00:00

Kirill Tkhai noted:

  Since deadline tasks share rt bandwidth, we must care about
  bandwidth timer set. Otherwise rt_time may grow up to infinity
  in update_curr_dl(), if there are no other available RT tasks
  on top level bandwidth.

RT task were in fact throttled right after they got enqueued,
and never executed again (rt_time never again went below rt_runtime).

Peter then proposed to accrue DL execution on rt_time only when
rt timer is active, and proposed a patch (this patch is a slight
modification of that) to implement that behavior. While this
solves Kirill problem, it has a drawback.

Indeed, Kirill noted again:

  It looks we may get into a situation, when all CPU time is shared
  between RT and DL tasks:

  rt_runtime = n
  rt_period  = 2n

  | RT working, DL sleeping  | DL working, RT sleeping      |
  -----------------------------------------------------------
  | (1)     duration = n     | (2)     duration = n         | (repeat)
  |--------------------------|------------------------------|
  | (rt_bw timer is running) | (rt_bw timer is not running) |

  No time for fair tasks at all.

While this can happen during the first period, if rq is always backlogged,
RT tasks won't have the opportunity to execute anymore: rt_time reached
rt_runtime during (1), suppose after (2) RT is enqueued back, it gets
throttled since rt timer didn't fire, replenishment is from now on eaten up
by DL tasks that accrue their execution on rt_time (while rt timer is
active - we have an RT task waiting for replenishment). FAIR tasks are
not touched after this first period. Ok, this is not ideal, and the situation
is even worse!

What above (the nice case), practically never happens in reality, where
your rt timer is not aligned to tasks periods, tasks are in general not
periodic, etc.. Long story short, you always risk to overload your system.

This patch is based on Peter's idea, but exploits an additional fact:
if you don't have RT tasks enqueued, it makes little sense to continue
incrementing rt_time once you reached the upper limit (DL tasks have their
own mechanism for throttling).

This cures both problems:

 - no matter how many DL instances in the past, you'll have an rt_time
   slightly above rt_runtime when an RT task is enqueued, and from that
   point on (after the first replenishment), the task will normally execute;

 - you can still eat up all bandwidth during the first period, but not
   anymore after that, remember that DL execution will increment rt_time
   till the upper limit is reached.

The situation is still not perfect! But, we have a simple solution for now,
that limits how much you can jeopardize your system, as we keep working
towards the right answer: RT groups scheduled using deadline servers.

Reported-by: Kirill Tkhai 
Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Steven Rostedt 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140225151515.617714e2f2cd6c558531ba61@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/deadline: Cleanup RT leftovers from {inc/dec}_dl_migration

2014-02-27T11:29:39+00:00

In deadline class we do not have group scheduling.

So, let's remove unnecessary

	X = X;

equations.

Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Juri Lelli 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1393343543.4089.5.camel@tkhai
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar

sched/deadline: Remove useless dl_nr_total

2014-02-21T20:27:10+00:00

In deadline class we do not have group scheduling like in RT.

dl_nr_total is the same as dl_nr_running. So, one of them should
be removed.

Cc: Ingo Molnar 
Cc: Juri Lelli 
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai 
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra 
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/368631392675853@web20h.yandex.ru
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner