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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200304213941.112303-1-xii@google.com> <20200305075742.GR2596@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <87blpad6b2.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
In-Reply-To: <87blpad6b2.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
From:   Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Mar 2020 14:07:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPM31RKR4w75Y8oNxS-cZ77AauvCFFXRzH=hhWXfr6LLQt2Myw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: watchdog: Touch kernel watchdog in sched code
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Xi Wang <xii@google.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:07 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 01:39:41PM -0800, Xi Wang wrote:
> >> The main purpose of kernel watchdog is to test whether scheduler can
> >> still schedule tasks on a cpu. In order to reduce latency from
> >> periodically invoking watchdog reset in thread context, we can simply
> >> touch watchdog from pick_next_task in scheduler. Compared to actually
> >> resetting watchdog from cpu stop / migration threads, we lose coverage
> >> on: a migration thread actually get picked and we actually context
> >> switch to the migration thread. Both steps are heavily protected by
> >> kernel locks and unlikely to silently fail. Thus the change would
> >> provide the same level of protection with less overhead.
> >>
> >> The new way vs the old way to touch the watchdogs is configurable
> >> from:
> >>
> >> /proc/sys/kernel/watchdog_touch_in_thread_interval
> >>
> >> The value means:
> >> 0: Always touch watchdog from pick_next_task
> >> 1: Always touch watchdog from migration thread
> >> N (N>0): Touch watchdog from migration thread once in every N
> >>          invocations, and touch watchdog from pick_next_task for
> >>          other invocations.
> >>
> >
> > This is configurable madness. What are we really trying to do here?
>
> Create yet another knob which will be advertised in random web blogs to
> solve all problems of the world and some more. Like the one which got
> silently turned into a NOOP ~10 years ago :)
>

The knob can obviously be removed, it's vestigial and reflects caution
from when we were implementing / rolling things over to it.  We have
default values that we know work at scale. I don't think this actually
needs or wants to be tunable beyond on or off (and even that could be
strictly compile or boot time only).