Part of the responsibility of the update_sg_lb_stats() function is to
update the idle_cpus statistical counter in struct sg_lb_stats. This
check is done by calling idle_cpu(). The idle_cpu() function, in
turn, checks a number of fields within the run queue structure such
as rq->curr and rq->nr_running.
With the current layout of the run queue structure, rq->curr and
rq->nr_running are in separate cachelines. The rq->curr variable is
checked first followed by nr_running. As nr_running is also accessed
by update_sg_lb_stats() earlier, it makes no sense to load another
cacheline when nr_running is not 0 as idle_cpu() will always return
false in this case.
This patch eliminates this redundant cacheline load by checking the
cached nr_running before calling idle_cpu().
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1448478580-26467-2-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
The current code accounts for the time a task was absent from the fair
class (per ATTACH_AGE_LOAD). However it does not work correctly when a
task got migrated or moved to another cgroup while outside of the fair
class.
This patch tries to address that by aging on migration. We locklessly
read the 'last_update_time' stamp from both the old and new cfs_rq,
ages the load upto the old time, and sets it to the new time.
These timestamps should in general not be more than 1 tick apart from
one another, so there is a definite bound on things.
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
[ Changelog, a few edits and !SMP build fix ]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1445616981-29904-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
At present scheduler resets task's wait start timestamp when the task
migrates to another rq. This misleads scheduler itself into reporting
less wait time than actual by omitting time spent for waiting prior to
migration and also more wait count than actual by counting migration as
wait end event which can be seen by trace or /proc/<pid>/sched with
CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS=y.
Carry forward migrating task's wait time prior to migration and
don't count migration as a wait end event to fix such statistics error.
In order to determine whether task is migrating mark task->on_rq with
TASK_ON_RQ_MIGRATING while dequeuing and enqueuing due to migration.
Signed-off-by: Joonwoo Park <joonwoop@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: ohaugan@codeaurora.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20151113033854.GA4247@codeaurora.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
There is a fundamental mismatch between the runtime based NUMA scanning
at the task level, and the wall clock time NUMA scanning at the mm level.
On a severely overloaded system, with very large processes, this mismatch
can cause the system to spend all of its time in change_prot_numa().
This can happen if the task spends at least two ticks in change_prot_numa(),
and only gets two ticks of CPU time in the real time between two scan
intervals of the mm.
This patch ensures that a task never spends more than 3% of run
time scanning PTEs. It does that by ensuring that in-between
task_numa_work() runs, the task spends at least 32x as much time on
other things than it did on task_numa_work().
This is done stochastically: if a timer tick happens, or the task
gets rescheduled during task_numa_work(), we delay a future run of
task_numa_work() until the task has spent at least 32x the amount of
CPU time doing something else, as it spent inside task_numa_work().
The longer task_numa_work() takes, the more likely it is this happens.
If task_numa_work() takes very little time, chances are low that that
code will do anything, but we will not care.
Reported-and-tested-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: mgorman@suse.de
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1446756983-28173-3-git-send-email-riel@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
There are some cases where distance between ticks is more than one tick
while the CPU is not idle, e.g. full NOHZ.
However __update_cpu_load() assumes it is the idle tickless case if the
distance between ticks is more than 1, even though it can be the active
tickless case as well. Thus in the active tickless case, updating the CPU
load will not be performed correctly.
Where the current code assumes the load for each tick is zero, this is
(obviously) not true in non-idle tickless case. We can approximately
consider the load ~= this_rq->cpu_load[0] during tickless in non-idle
tickless case.
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1444816056-11886-2-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Currently task_numa_work() scans up to numa_balancing_scan_size_mb worth
of memory per invocation, but only counts memory areas that have at
least one PTE that is still present and not marked for numa hint faulting.
It will skip over arbitarily large amounts of memory that are either
unused, full of swap ptes, or full of PTEs that were already marked
for NUMA hint faults but have not been faulted on yet.
This can cause excessive amounts of CPU use, due to there being
essentially no upper limit on the scan rate of very large processes
that are not yet in a phase where they are actively accessing old
memory pages (eg. they are still initializing their data).
Avoid that problem by placing an upper limit on the amount of virtual
memory that task_numa_work() scans in each invocation. This can be a
higher limit than "pages", to ensure the task still skips over unused
areas fairly quickly.
While we are here, also fix the "nr_pte_updates" logic, so it only
counts page ranges with ptes in them.
Reported-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Reported-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150911090027.4a7987bd@annuminas.surriel.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Currently the load_{sum,avg} and util_{sum,avg} tracking is asymmetric
in that load tracking gets a 2^10 unit from the weight, but util gets
no such factor.
This results in more lost bits for util scaling and asymmetric scaling
rules.
Fix this by removing shifts, such that we gain the 2^10 factor from
scaling. There is no risk of overflowing the u32 as the max value is
now LOAD_AVG_MAX << 10, which is still well below UINT_MAX.
This further entangles the assumption that both LOAD and CAPACITY
shifts are the same (and 10) so put in an assertion for that.
This fixes the math for the LOAD_RESOLUTION != 0 case.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Prior to this patch; the line:
scaled_delta_w = (delta_w * 1024) >> 10;
which is the result of the default arch_scale_freq_capacity()
function, turns into:
1b03: 49 89 d1 mov %rdx,%r9
1b06: 49 c1 e1 0a shl $0xa,%r9
1b0a: 49 c1 e9 0a shr $0xa,%r9
Which is silly; when made unsigned int, GCC recognises this as
pointless ops and fails to emit them (confirmed on 4.9.3 and 5.1.1).
Furthermore, afaict unsigned is actually the correct type for these
fields anyway, as we've explicitly ruled out negative delta's earlier
in this function.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Besides the existing frequency scale-invariance correction factor, apply
CPU scale-invariance correction factor to utilization tracking to
compensate for any differences in compute capacity. This could be due to
micro-architectural differences (i.e. instructions per seconds) between
cpus in HMP systems (e.g. big.LITTLE), and/or differences in the current
maximum frequency supported by individual cpus in SMP systems. In the
existing implementation utilization isn't comparable between cpus as it
is relative to the capacity of each individual CPU.
Each segment of the sched_avg.util_sum geometric series is now scaled
by the CPU performance factor too so the sched_avg.util_avg of each
sched entity will be invariant from the particular CPU of the HMP/SMP
system on which the sched entity is scheduled.
With this patch, the utilization of a CPU stays relative to the max CPU
performance of the fastest CPU in the system.
In contrast to utilization (sched_avg.util_sum), load
(sched_avg.load_sum) should not be scaled by compute capacity. The
utilization metric is based on running time which only makes sense when
cpus are _not_ fully utilized (utilization cannot go beyond 100% even if
more tasks are added), where load is runnable time which isn't limited
by the capacity of the CPU and therefore is a better metric for
overloaded scenarios. If we run two nice-0 busy loops on two cpus with
different compute capacity their load should be similar since their
compute demands are the same. We have to assume that the compute demand
of any task running on a fully utilized CPU (no spare cycles = 100%
utilization) is high and the same no matter of the compute capacity of
its current CPU, hence we shouldn't scale load by CPU capacity.
Signed-off-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/55CE7409.1000700@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Since commit:
d4573c3e1c ("sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs")
the ILB CPU starts with the idle load balancing of other idle CPUs and
finishes with itself in order to speed up the spread of tasks in all
idle CPUs.
The this_rq->next_balance is still used in nohz_idle_balance() as an
intermediate step to gather the shortest next balance before updating
nohz.next_balance. But the former has not been updated yet and is likely to
be set with the current jiffies. As a result, the nohz.next_balance will be
set with current jiffies instead of the real next balance date. This
generates spurious kicks of nohz ilde balance.
nohz_idle_balance() must set the nohz.next_balance without taking into
account this_rq->next_balance which is not updated yet. Then, this_rq will
update nohz.next_update with its next_balance once updated and if necessary.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1438595750-20455-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
By observing that switched_from_fair() detaches from a runqueue, and
switched_to_fair() attaches to a runqueue, we can see that
task_move_group_fair() is one followed by the other with flipping the
runqueue in between.
Therefore extract all the common bits and implement all three
functions in terms of them.
This should fix a few corner cases wrt. vruntime normalization; where,
when we take a task off of a runqueue we convert to an approximation
of lag by subtracting min_vruntime, and when placing a task on the a
runqueue to the reverse.
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
[peterz: Changelog]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1440069720-27038-6-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Where switched_from_fair() will remove the entity's load from the
runqueue, switched_to_fair() does not currently add it back. This
means that when a task leaves the fair class for a short duration; say
because of PI; we loose its load contribution.
This can ripple forward and disturb the load tracking because other
operations (enqueue, dequeue) assume its factored in. Only once the
runqueue empties will the load tracking recover.
When we add it back in, age the per entity average to match up with
the runqueue age. This has the obvious problem that if the task leaves
the fair class for a significant time, the load will age to 0.
Employ the normal migration rule for inter-runqueue moves in
task_move_group_fair(). Again, there is the obvious problem of the
task migrating while not in the fair class.
The alternative solution would be to to omit the chunk in
attach_entity_load_avg(), which would effectively reset the timestamp
and use whatever avg there was.
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
[ Rewrote the changelog and comments. ]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: yuyang.du@intel.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1440069720-27038-5-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
The idea of runnable load average (let runnable time contribute to weight)
was proposed by Paul Turner and Ben Segall, and it is still followed by
this rewrite. This rewrite aims to solve the following issues:
1. cfs_rq's load average (namely runnable_load_avg and blocked_load_avg) is
updated at the granularity of an entity at a time, which results in the
cfs_rq's load average is stale or partially updated: at any time, only
one entity is up to date, all other entities are effectively lagging
behind. This is undesirable.
To illustrate, if we have n runnable entities in the cfs_rq, as time
elapses, they certainly become outdated:
t0: cfs_rq { e1_old, e2_old, ..., en_old }
and when we update:
t1: update e1, then we have cfs_rq { e1_new, e2_old, ..., en_old }
t2: update e2, then we have cfs_rq { e1_old, e2_new, ..., en_old }
...
We solve this by combining all runnable entities' load averages together
in cfs_rq's avg, and update the cfs_rq's avg as a whole. This is based
on the fact that if we regard the update as a function, then:
w * update(e) = update(w * e) and
update(e1) + update(e2) = update(e1 + e2), then
w1 * update(e1) + w2 * update(e2) = update(w1 * e1 + w2 * e2)
therefore, by this rewrite, we have an entirely updated cfs_rq at the
time we update it:
t1: update cfs_rq { e1_new, e2_new, ..., en_new }
t2: update cfs_rq { e1_new, e2_new, ..., en_new }
...
2. cfs_rq's load average is different between top rq->cfs_rq and other
task_group's per CPU cfs_rqs in whether or not blocked_load_average
contributes to the load.
The basic idea behind runnable load average (the same for utilization)
is that the blocked state is taken into account as opposed to only
accounting for the currently runnable state. Therefore, the average
should include both the runnable/running and blocked load averages.
This rewrite does that.
In addition, we also combine runnable/running and blocked averages
of all entities into the cfs_rq's average, and update it together at
once. This is based on the fact that:
update(runnable) + update(blocked) = update(runnable + blocked)
This significantly reduces the code as we don't need to separately
maintain/update runnable/running load and blocked load.
3. How task_group entities' share is calculated is complex and imprecise.
We reduce the complexity in this rewrite to allow a very simple rule:
the task_group's load_avg is aggregated from its per CPU cfs_rqs's
load_avgs. Then group entity's weight is simply proportional to its
own cfs_rq's load_avg / task_group's load_avg. To illustrate,
if a task_group has { cfs_rq1, cfs_rq2, ..., cfs_rqn }, then,
task_group_avg = cfs_rq1_avg + cfs_rq2_avg + ... + cfs_rqn_avg, then
cfs_rqx's entity's share = cfs_rqx_avg / task_group_avg * task_group's share
To sum up, this rewrite in principle is equivalent to the current one, but
fixes the issues described above. Turns out, it significantly reduces the
code complexity and hence increases clarity and efficiency. In addition,
the new averages are more smooth/continuous (no spurious spikes and valleys)
and updated more consistently and quickly to reflect the load dynamics.
As a result, we have less load tracking overhead, better performance,
and especially better power efficiency due to more balanced load.
Signed-off-by: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: arjan@linux.intel.com
Cc: bsegall@google.com
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com
Cc: fengguang.wu@intel.com
Cc: len.brown@intel.com
Cc: morten.rasmussen@arm.com
Cc: pjt@google.com
Cc: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com
Cc: umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1436918682-4971-3-git-send-email-yuyang.du@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
