Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210323035706.572953-1-joshdon@google.com> <YFsIZjhCFbxKyos3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YFsaYBO/UqMHSpGS@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20210324114224.GP15768@suse.de>
 <YFssoD5NDl6dFfg/@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20210324133916.GQ15768@suse.de>
 <YFtOXpl1vWp47Qud@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20210324155224.GR15768@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <20210324155224.GR15768@suse.de>
From:   Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:58:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CABk29Nu7rR=_enuU8ecogtwCU3E4ygP0m+nmBH-KqKTRzDCe=A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: Warn on long periods of pending need_resched
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        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>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Oleg Rombakh <olegrom@google.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:39:16PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> I'm not going to NAK because I do not have hard data that shows they must
> exist. However, I won't ACK either because I bet a lot of tasty beverages
> the next time we meet that the following parameters will generate reports
> if removed.
>
> kernel.sched_latency_ns
> kernel.sched_migration_cost_ns
> kernel.sched_min_granularity_ns
> kernel.sched_wakeup_granularity_ns
>
> I know they are altered by tuned for different profiles and some people do
> go the effort to create custom profiles for specific applications. They
> also show up in "Official Benchmarking" such as SPEC CPU 2017 and
> some vendors put a *lot* of effort into SPEC CPU results for bragging
> rights. They show up in technical books and best practice guids for
> applications.  Finally they show up in Google when searching for "tuning
> sched_foo". I'm not saying that any of these are even accurate or a good
> idea, just that they show up near the top of the results and they are
> sufficiently popular that they might as well be an ABI.

+1, these seem like sufficiently well-known scheduler tunables, and
not really SCHED_DEBUG.