Because someone is a flaming idiot... and forgot we have current as
se->on_rq but not actually in the tree itself, and walking rb_parent()
on an entry not in the tree is 'funky' and KASAN complains.
Fixes: 8dafa9d0eb1a ("sched/eevdf: Fix min_deadline heap integrity")
Reported-by: 0599jiangyc@gmail.com
Reported-by: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>
Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218020
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJwJo6ZGXO07%3DQvW4fgQfbsDzQPs9xj5sAQ1zp%3DmAyPMNbHYww%40mail.gmail.com
The old pick_eevdf() could fail to find the actual earliest eligible
deadline when it descended to the right looking for min_deadline, but
it turned out that that min_deadline wasn't actually eligible. In that
case we need to go back and search through any left branches we
skipped looking for the actual best _eligible_ min_deadline.
This is more expensive, but still O(log n), and at worst should only
involve descending two branches of the rbtree.
I've run this through a userspace stress test (thank you
tools/lib/rbtree.c), so hopefully this implementation doesn't miss any
corner cases.
Fixes: 147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
Signed-off-by: Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/xm261qego72d.fsf_-_@google.com
Marek and Biju reported instances of:
"EEVDF scheduling fail, picking leftmost"
which Mike correlated with cgroup scheduling and the min_deadline heap
getting corrupted; some trace output confirms:
> And yeah, min_deadline is hosed somehow:
>
> validate_cfs_rq: --- /
> __print_se: ffff88845cf48080 w: 1024 ve: -58857638 lag: 870381 vd: -55861854 vmd: -66302085 E (11372/tr)
> __print_se: ffff88810d165800 w: 25 ve: -80323686 lag: 22336429 vd: -41496434 vmd: -66302085 E (-1//autogroup-31)
> __print_se: ffff888108379000 w: 25 ve: 0 lag: -57987257 vd: 114632828 vmd: 114632828 N (-1//autogroup-33)
> validate_cfs_rq: min_deadline: -55861854 avg_vruntime: -62278313462 / 1074 = -57987256
Turns out that reweight_entity(), which tries really hard to be fast,
does not do the normal dequeue+update+enqueue pattern but *does* scale
the deadline.
However, it then fails to propagate the updated deadline value up the
heap.
Fixes: 147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Reported-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>
Reported-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Tested-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>
Tested-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20231006192445.GE743@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
The expectation is that placing a task at avg_vruntime() makes it
eligible. Turns out there is a corner case where this is not the case.
Specifically, avg_vruntime() relies on the fact that integer division
is a flooring function (eg. it discards the remainder). By this
property the value returned is slightly left of the true average.
However! when the average is a negative (relative to min_vruntime) the
effect is flipped and it becomes a ceil, with the result that the
returned value is just right of the average and thus not eligible.
Fixes: af4cf40470c2 ("sched/fair: Add cfs_rq::avg_vruntime")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tasks that never consume their full slice would not update their slice value.
This means that tasks that are spawned before the sysctl scaling keep their
original (UP) slice length.
Fixes: 147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230915124822.847197830@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
For SMT4, any group with more than 2 tasks will be marked as
group_smt_balance. Retain the behaviour of group_has_spare by marking
the busiest group as the group which has the least number of idle_cpus.
Also, handle rounding effect of adding (ncores_local + ncores_busy) when
the local is fully idle and busy group imbalance is less than 2 tasks.
Local group should try to pull at least 1 task in this case so imbalance
should be set to 2 instead.
Fixes: fee1759e4f04 ("sched/fair: Determine active load balance for SMT sched groups")
Acked-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/6cd1633036bb6b651af575c32c2a9608a106702c.camel@linux.intel.com
should_we_balance() is called in load_balance() to find out if the CPU that
is trying to do the load balance is the right one or not.
With commit:
b1bfeab9b002("sched/fair: Consider the idle state of the whole core for load balance")
the code tries to find an idle core to do the load balancing
and falls back on an idle sibling CPU if there is no idle core.
However, on larger SMT systems, it could be needlessly iterating to find a
idle by scanning all the CPUs in an non-idle core. If the core is not idle,
and first SMT sibling which is idle has been found, then its not needed to
check other SMT siblings for idleness
Lets say in SMT4, Core0 has 0,2,4,6 and CPU0 is BUSY and rest are IDLE.
balancing domain is MC/DIE. CPU2 will be set as the first idle_smt and
same process would be repeated for CPU4 and CPU6 but this is unnecessary.
Since calling is_core_idle loops through all CPU's in the SMT mask, effect
is multiplied by weight of smt_mask. For example,when say 1 CPU is busy,
we would skip loop for 2 CPU's and skip iterating over 8CPU's. That
effect would be more in DIE/NUMA domain where there are more cores.
Testing and performance evaluation
==================================
The test has been done on this system which has 12 cores, i.e 24 small
cores with SMT=4:
lscpu
Architecture: ppc64le
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s): 96
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-95
Model name: POWER10 (architected), altivec supported
Thread(s) per core: 8
Used funclatency bcc tool to evaluate the time taken by should_we_balance(). For
base tip/sched/core the time taken is collected by making the
should_we_balance() noinline. time is in nanoseconds. The values are
collected by running the funclatency tracer for 60 seconds. values are
average of 3 such runs. This represents the expected reduced time with
patch.
tip/sched/core was at commit:
2f88c8e802c8 ("sched/eevdf/doc: Modify the documented knob to base_slice_ns as well")
Results:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
workload tip/sched/core with_patch(%gain)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
idle system 809.3 695.0(16.45)
stress ng – 12 threads -l 100 1013.5 893.1(13.49)
stress ng – 24 threads -l 100 1073.5 980.0(9.54)
stress ng – 48 threads -l 100 683.0 641.0(6.55)
stress ng – 96 threads -l 100 2421.0 2300(5.26)
stress ng – 96 threads -l 15 375.5 377.5(-0.53)
stress ng – 96 threads -l 25 635.5 637.5(-0.31)
stress ng – 96 threads -l 35 934.0 891.0(4.83)
Ran schbench(old), hackbench and stress_ng to evaluate the workload
performance between tip/sched/core and with patch.
No modification to tip/sched/core
TL;DR:
Good improvement is seen with schbench. when hackbench and stress_ng
runs for longer good improvement is seen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
schbench(old) tip +patch(%gain)
10 iterations sched/core
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Threads
50.0th: 8.00 9.00(-12.50)
75.0th: 9.60 9.00(6.25)
90.0th: 11.80 10.20(13.56)
95.0th: 12.60 10.40(17.46)
99.0th: 13.60 11.90(12.50)
99.5th: 14.10 12.60(10.64)
99.9th: 15.90 14.60(8.18)
2 Threads
50.0th: 9.90 9.20(7.07)
75.0th: 12.60 10.10(19.84)
90.0th: 15.50 12.00(22.58)
95.0th: 17.70 14.00(20.90)
99.0th: 21.20 16.90(20.28)
99.5th: 22.60 17.50(22.57)
99.9th: 30.40 19.40(36.18)
4 Threads
50.0th: 12.50 10.60(15.20)
75.0th: 15.30 12.00(21.57)
90.0th: 18.60 14.10(24.19)
95.0th: 21.30 16.20(23.94)
99.0th: 26.00 20.70(20.38)
99.5th: 27.60 22.50(18.48)
99.9th: 33.90 31.40(7.37)
8 Threads
50.0th: 16.30 14.30(12.27)
75.0th: 20.20 17.40(13.86)
90.0th: 24.50 21.90(10.61)
95.0th: 27.30 24.70(9.52)
99.0th: 35.00 31.20(10.86)
99.5th: 46.40 33.30(28.23)
99.9th: 89.30 57.50(35.61)
16 Threads
50.0th: 22.70 20.70(8.81)
75.0th: 30.10 27.40(8.97)
90.0th: 36.00 32.80(8.89)
95.0th: 39.60 36.40(8.08)
99.0th: 49.20 44.10(10.37)
99.5th: 64.90 50.50(22.19)
99.9th: 143.50 100.60(29.90)
32 Threads
50.0th: 34.60 35.50(-2.60)
75.0th: 48.20 50.50(-4.77)
90.0th: 59.20 62.40(-5.41)
95.0th: 65.20 69.00(-5.83)
99.0th: 80.40 83.80(-4.23)
99.5th: 102.10 98.90(3.13)
99.9th: 727.10 506.80(30.30)
schbench does improve in general. There is some run to run variation with
schbench. Did a validation run to confirm that trend is similar.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hackbench tip +patch(%gain)
20 iterations, 50000 loops sched/core
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process 10 groups : 11.74 11.70(0.34)
Process 20 groups : 22.73 22.69(0.18)
Process 30 groups : 33.39 33.40(-0.03)
Process 40 groups : 43.73 43.61(0.27)
Process 50 groups : 53.82 54.35(-0.98)
Process 60 groups : 64.16 65.29(-1.76)
thread 10 Time : 12.81 12.79(0.16)
thread 20 Time : 24.63 24.47(0.65)
Process(Pipe) 10 Time : 6.40 6.34(0.94)
Process(Pipe) 20 Time : 10.62 10.63(-0.09)
Process(Pipe) 30 Time : 15.09 14.84(1.66)
Process(Pipe) 40 Time : 19.42 19.01(2.11)
Process(Pipe) 50 Time : 24.04 23.34(2.91)
Process(Pipe) 60 Time : 28.94 27.51(4.94)
thread(Pipe) 10 Time : 6.96 6.87(1.29)
thread(Pipe) 20 Time : 11.74 11.73(0.09)
hackbench shows slight improvement with pipe. Slight degradation in process.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
stress_ng tip +patch(%gain)
10 iterations 100000 cpu_ops sched/core
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--cpu=96 -util=100 Time taken : 5.30, 5.01(5.47)
--cpu=48 -util=100 Time taken : 7.94, 6.73(15.24)
--cpu=24 -util=100 Time taken : 11.67, 8.75(25.02)
--cpu=12 -util=100 Time taken : 15.71, 15.02(4.39)
--cpu=96 -util=10 Time taken : 22.71, 22.19(2.29)
--cpu=96 -util=20 Time taken : 12.14, 12.37(-1.89)
--cpu=96 -util=30 Time taken : 8.76, 8.86(-1.14)
--cpu=96 -util=40 Time taken : 7.13, 7.14(-0.14)
--cpu=96 -util=50 Time taken : 6.10, 6.13(-0.49)
--cpu=96 -util=60 Time taken : 5.42, 5.41(0.18)
--cpu=96 -util=70 Time taken : 4.94, 4.94(0.00)
--cpu=96 -util=80 Time taken : 4.56, 4.53(0.66)
--cpu=96 -util=90 Time taken : 4.27, 4.26(0.23)
Good improvement seen with 24 CPUs. In this case only one CPU is busy,
and no core is idle. Decent improvement with 100% utilization case. no
difference in other utilization.
Fixes: b1bfeab9b002 ("sched/fair: Consider the idle state of the whole core for load balance")
Signed-off-by: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230902081204.232218-1-sshegde@linux.vnet.ibm.com
The function update_entity_lag() is only used inside the kernel/sched/fair.c file. Make it static. Signed-off-by: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230829030325.69128-1-jiahao.os@bytedance.com
Pull misc x86 cleanups from Ingo Molnar:
"The following commit deserves special mention:
22dc02f81cddd Revert "sched/fair: Move unused stub functions to header"
This is in x86/cleanups, because the revert is a re-application of a
number of cleanups that got removed inadvertedly"
[ This also effectively undoes the amd_check_microcode() microcode
declaration change I had done in my microcode loader merge in commit
42a7f6e3ffe0 ("Merge tag 'x86_microcode_for_v6.6_rc1' [...]").
I picked the declaration change by Arnd from this branch instead,
which put it in <asm/processor.h> instead of <asm/microcode.h> like I
had done in my merge resolution - Linus ]
* tag 'x86-cleanups-2023-08-28' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
x86/platform/uv: Refactor code using deprecated strncpy() interface to use strscpy()
x86/hpet: Refactor code using deprecated strncpy() interface to use strscpy()
x86/platform/uv: Refactor code using deprecated strcpy()/strncpy() interfaces to use strscpy()
x86/qspinlock-paravirt: Fix missing-prototype warning
x86/paravirt: Silence unused native_pv_lock_init() function warning
x86/alternative: Add a __alt_reloc_selftest() prototype
x86/purgatory: Include header for warn() declaration
x86/asm: Avoid unneeded __div64_32 function definition
Revert "sched/fair: Move unused stub functions to header"
x86/apic: Hide unused safe_smp_processor_id() on 32-bit UP
x86/cpu: Fix amd_check_microcode() declaration
Pull scheduler updates from Ingo Molnar:
- The biggest change is introduction of a new iteration of the
SCHED_FAIR interactivity code: the EEVDF ("Earliest Eligible Virtual
Deadline First") scheduler
EEVDF too is a virtual-time scheduler, with two parameters (weight
and relative deadline), compared to CFS that had weight only. It
completely reworks the base scheduler: placement, preemption, picking
-- everything
LWN.net, as usual, has a terrific writeup about EEVDF:
https://lwn.net/Articles/925371/
Preemption (both tick and wakeup) is driven by testing against a
fresh pick. Because the tree is now effectively an interval tree, and
the selection is no longer the 'leftmost' task, over-scheduling is
less of a problem. A lot of the CFS heuristics are removed or
replaced by more natural latency-space parameters & constructs
In terms of expected performance regressions: we will and can fix
everything where a 'good' workload misbehaves with the new scheduler,
but EEVDF inevitably changes workload scheduling in a binary fashion,
hopefully for the better in the overwhelming majority of cases, but
in some cases it won't, especially in adversarial loads that got
lucky with the previous code, such as some variants of hackbench. We
are trying hard to err on the side of fixing all performance
regressions, but we expect some inevitable post-release iterations of
that process
- Improve load-balancing on hybrid x86 systems: enable cluster
scheduling (again)
- Improve & fix bandwidth-scheduling on nohz systems
- Improve bandwidth-throttling
- Use lock guards to simplify and de-goto-ify control flow
- Misc improvements, cleanups and fixes
* tag 'sched-core-2023-08-28' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (43 commits)
sched/eevdf/doc: Modify the documented knob to base_slice_ns as well
sched/eevdf: Curb wakeup-preemption
sched: Simplify sched_core_cpu_{starting,deactivate}()
sched: Simplify try_steal_cookie()
sched: Simplify sched_tick_remote()
sched: Simplify sched_exec()
sched: Simplify ttwu()
sched: Simplify wake_up_if_idle()
sched: Simplify: migrate_swap_stop()
sched: Simplify sysctl_sched_uclamp_handler()
sched: Simplify get_nohz_timer_target()
sched/rt: sysctl_sched_rr_timeslice show default timeslice after reset
sched/rt: Fix sysctl_sched_rr_timeslice intial value
sched/fair: Block nohz tick_stop when cfs bandwidth in use
sched, cgroup: Restore meaning to hierarchical_quota
MAINTAINERS: Add Peter explicitly to the psi section
sched/psi: Select KERNFS as needed
sched/topology: Align group flags when removing degenerate domain
sched/fair: remove util_est boosting
sched/fair: Propagate enqueue flags into place_entity()
...