Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 6 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0500
From:   Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>
To:     bsegall@google.com
Cc:     mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC]  sched/fair: hard lockup in sched_cfs_period_timer
Message-ID: <20190306162313.GB8786@pauld.bos.csb>
References: <20190301145209.GA9304@pauld.bos.csb>
 <xm26ef7mzew2.fsf@bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com>
 <20190304190510.GB5366@lorien.usersys.redhat.com>
 <xm268sxtyx5u.fsf@bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com>
 <20190305200554.GA8786@pauld.bos.csb>
 <xm261s3lyrrl.fsf@bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <xm261s3lyrrl.fsf@bsegall-linux.svl.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 12:45:34PM -0800 bsegall@google.com wrote:
> Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Interestingly, if I limit the number of child cgroups to the number of 
> > them I'm actually putting processes into (16 down from 2500) the problem
> > does not reproduce.
> 
> That is indeed interesting, and definitely not something we'd want to
> matter. (Particularly if it's not root->a->b->c...->throttled_cgroup or
> root->throttled->a->...->thread vs root->throttled_cgroup, which is what
> I was originally thinking of)
> 

The locking may be a red herring.

The setup is root->throttled->a where a is 1-2500. There are 4 threads in
each of the first 16 a groups.  The parent, throttled, is where the 
cfs_period/quota_us are set. 

I wonder if the problem is the walk_tg_tree_from() call in unthrottle_cfs_rq(). 

The distribute_cfg_runtime looks to be O(n * m) where n is number of 
throttled cfs_rqs and m is the number of child cgroups. But I'm not 
completely clear on how the hierarchical cgroups play together here. 

I'll pull on this thread some. 

Thanks for your input.


Cheers,
Phil

--