123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173 |
- =========
- Schedutil
- =========
- .. note::
- All this assumes a linear relation between frequency and work capacity,
- we know this is flawed, but it is the best workable approximation.
- PELT (Per Entity Load Tracking)
- ===============================
- With PELT we track some metrics across the various scheduler entities, from
- individual tasks to task-group slices to CPU runqueues. As the basis for this
- we use an Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (EWMA), each period (1024us)
- is decayed such that y^32 = 0.5. That is, the most recent 32ms contribute
- half, while the rest of history contribute the other half.
- Specifically:
- ewma_sum(u) := u_0 + u_1*y + u_2*y^2 + ...
- ewma(u) = ewma_sum(u) / ewma_sum(1)
- Since this is essentially a progression of an infinite geometric series, the
- results are composable, that is ewma(A) + ewma(B) = ewma(A+B). This property
- is key, since it gives the ability to recompose the averages when tasks move
- around.
- Note that blocked tasks still contribute to the aggregates (task-group slices
- and CPU runqueues), which reflects their expected contribution when they
- resume running.
- Using this we track 2 key metrics: 'running' and 'runnable'. 'Running'
- reflects the time an entity spends on the CPU, while 'runnable' reflects the
- time an entity spends on the runqueue. When there is only a single task these
- two metrics are the same, but once there is contention for the CPU 'running'
- will decrease to reflect the fraction of time each task spends on the CPU
- while 'runnable' will increase to reflect the amount of contention.
- For more detail see: kernel/sched/pelt.c
- Frequency / CPU Invariance
- ==========================
- Because consuming the CPU for 50% at 1GHz is not the same as consuming the CPU
- for 50% at 2GHz, nor is running 50% on a LITTLE CPU the same as running 50% on
- a big CPU, we allow architectures to scale the time delta with two ratios, one
- Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling (DVFS) ratio and one microarch ratio.
- For simple DVFS architectures (where software is in full control) we trivially
- compute the ratio as::
- f_cur
- r_dvfs := -----
- f_max
- For more dynamic systems where the hardware is in control of DVFS we use
- hardware counters (Intel APERF/MPERF, ARMv8.4-AMU) to provide us this ratio.
- For Intel specifically, we use::
- APERF
- f_cur := ----- * P0
- MPERF
- 4C-turbo; if available and turbo enabled
- f_max := { 1C-turbo; if turbo enabled
- P0; otherwise
- f_cur
- r_dvfs := min( 1, ----- )
- f_max
- We pick 4C turbo over 1C turbo to make it slightly more sustainable.
- r_cpu is determined as the ratio of highest performance level of the current
- CPU vs the highest performance level of any other CPU in the system.
- r_tot = r_dvfs * r_cpu
- The result is that the above 'running' and 'runnable' metrics become invariant
- of DVFS and CPU type. IOW. we can transfer and compare them between CPUs.
- For more detail see:
- - kernel/sched/pelt.h:update_rq_clock_pelt()
- - arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:"APERF/MPERF frequency ratio computation."
- - Documentation/scheduler/sched-capacity.rst:"1. CPU Capacity + 2. Task utilization"
- UTIL_EST / UTIL_EST_FASTUP
- ==========================
- Because periodic tasks have their averages decayed while they sleep, even
- though when running their expected utilization will be the same, they suffer a
- (DVFS) ramp-up after they are running again.
- To alleviate this (a default enabled option) UTIL_EST drives an Infinite
- Impulse Response (IIR) EWMA with the 'running' value on dequeue -- when it is
- highest. A further default enabled option UTIL_EST_FASTUP modifies the IIR
- filter to instantly increase and only decay on decrease.
- A further runqueue wide sum (of runnable tasks) is maintained of:
- util_est := \Sum_t max( t_running, t_util_est_ewma )
- For more detail see: kernel/sched/fair.c:util_est_dequeue()
- UCLAMP
- ======
- It is possible to set effective u_min and u_max clamps on each CFS or RT task;
- the runqueue keeps an max aggregate of these clamps for all running tasks.
- For more detail see: include/uapi/linux/sched/types.h
- Schedutil / DVFS
- ================
- Every time the scheduler load tracking is updated (task wakeup, task
- migration, time progression) we call out to schedutil to update the hardware
- DVFS state.
- The basis is the CPU runqueue's 'running' metric, which per the above it is
- the frequency invariant utilization estimate of the CPU. From this we compute
- a desired frequency like::
- max( running, util_est ); if UTIL_EST
- u_cfs := { running; otherwise
- clamp( u_cfs + u_rt , u_min, u_max ); if UCLAMP_TASK
- u_clamp := { u_cfs + u_rt; otherwise
- u := u_clamp + u_irq + u_dl; [approx. see source for more detail]
- f_des := min( f_max, 1.25 u * f_max )
- XXX IO-wait: when the update is due to a task wakeup from IO-completion we
- boost 'u' above.
- This frequency is then used to select a P-state/OPP or directly munged into a
- CPPC style request to the hardware.
- XXX: deadline tasks (Sporadic Task Model) allows us to calculate a hard f_min
- required to satisfy the workload.
- Because these callbacks are directly from the scheduler, the DVFS hardware
- interaction should be 'fast' and non-blocking. Schedutil supports
- rate-limiting DVFS requests for when hardware interaction is slow and
- expensive, this reduces effectiveness.
- For more information see: kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c
- NOTES
- =====
- - On low-load scenarios, where DVFS is most relevant, the 'running' numbers
- will closely reflect utilization.
- - In saturated scenarios task movement will cause some transient dips,
- suppose we have a CPU saturated with 4 tasks, then when we migrate a task
- to an idle CPU, the old CPU will have a 'running' value of 0.75 while the
- new CPU will gain 0.25. This is inevitable and time progression will
- correct this. XXX do we still guarantee f_max due to no idle-time?
- - Much of the above is about avoiding DVFS dips, and independent DVFS domains
- having to re-learn / ramp-up when load shifts.
|