Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-189347-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 19:57:41 +0800
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
CC: Chunxin Zang <spring.cxz@gmail.com>, <mingo@redhat.com>,
	<peterz@infradead.org>, <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	<vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <bsegall@google.com>, <mgorman@suse.de>,
	<bristot@redhat.com>, <vschneid@redhat.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<yangchen11@lixiang.com>, <zhouchunhua@lixiang.com>,
	<zangchunxin@lixiang.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Reschedule the cfs_rq when current is
 ineligible
Message-ID: <ZlHSNXe0c5/sx9D9@chenyu5-mobl2>
References: <20240524134011.270861-1-spring.cxz@gmail.com>
 <e17d3d90440997b970067fe9eaf088903c65f41d.camel@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e17d3d90440997b970067fe9eaf088903c65f41d.camel@gmx.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?hprZRUi6k24c00BbRIX6NWCy6E/EYapF5QmpU6Gn84J1/W97oskP+XgD0FOJ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fthnnCJOxsuzVGhroozZhpFf7ZQHzebp0n07uF85yJE/6N1Otoc+ZRmIqwpm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?qAKqcT4dpQ8l+oP9PkjscJ9/6LIVxnfKcW5X3sWs7cqsVzolj2uW2O2ugqS4?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?JfqYh9YbMwXvL0d+vPPh2Jr31NFl1DfRmiMZrtlCpdPYUa6/WX3GTuLrc2h0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?qNiM9ycHxHDbuMXfq4w5n2iA+E3hRMI0RsQbCIqMgoQGphgCefZgo4XlTXTa?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?HjZEUBzl1wh9F3GtoZVGma2qbsgrRr3wqOkw4kgone5XCiiJ64oaUn8q6Czf?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?W7lg2Ft6TarQwffpWh+w+fTiThdOlexOQXr4YBaw5mOgTJefLDFAZ8ryOljI?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?MamCvJomMcS0xc85kKxC1ISVT7LmzWXpvfjgcD6J3YvN6RILiHcMqM58Nogs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?IQ+yPv0itbm7E4dpE5N1fBGGlSqebkLSgFe6VY2tjkuU3Gk6/tFiAsYbnwzP?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ECJKHozNavHFl3m8xfOoi+OcZ5p9sfXN9UOeOmnp40ej8hZ8EZaCbW5wLY+/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?UB9/QU0UWc0weY9RZOlegxQ8ytZVGeMNDrADOdh7+iYcynmphVWhwjs7F/AJ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?7Nz7pZ6e3xkPRm8C2BqmWrZbCn14IYiKZcvvrWcMNb2GcPubeGRZalFkGh8W?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Z9W+Pwih5EYSQ6RhyYOHNOzvN8D3tSKkr0j1AeoHxT/wOMIC57Fb461q8Vyj?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?CoPgcArs/z/mLMYVhylAD72+okutqRpEL3VpKjedSXmPMsIsoj2bF8Ci1s6X?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?t/h/Vk8DcSg3GOqvMEsFXB6pwM+cunxzpzjA8qzLtPtkMXtvupxLOkD0aLme?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?NT2JbQnKdzH3VxVpobjknjRFtRjSoM/jnnmwKmVYG/3IlC/3BVbiDSOSUBUx?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?64dlLjfFviL0gKTg3t4/z1LyhJHc2YnRpjUVPisKdR22zbPUsPCm9z9mx57Y?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?acZNNagzdmR/PlUJRWdkH3x7/H2qaScrMsD4f8E05Wk0kOW+CKecYpZiBBwn?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ZnVBtrK1o69KLiOcEcvQmrZgm1x8BTKYPzTQ1J8cVNJIGCpeozl7K0GuBNOy?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?8VhrjcXCaI87TzhetkTUxo56PNZvJXe2ziTx4XqBA5Uhm5ywS3DMtHry6yh+?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wbhHO3Eaf/+pUz5yNu1zED7TACVZ14OBuSnrwQ6iKsDRUMOJpdJVB/4g072P?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?4umZLgliEwnPGHmYA8qpeouwBPMUX7uwumk28hvl/p5/YQWF4Iq2qY8qnAiy?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fzhepnWzv+Ktr4BsUXNQhW7o1/ywsuE6HbGWppHdrtvp31Tkum+PnoUwqF9K?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?u3ozkb8D0LH2c3OQUDkhU5z6D+5rBRzbYVE4y0KBBCOXzYOMQcR0NCxC70RQ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wu0Y694U/JpRxX7OFHd4xrX2jDSIg3elNR+LNwbwE6z6kvQqeoUf8nDoCP47?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tlZVaHwp4sCDljp1OxUaKg3cvdVR9zMzM56m9Xxj05RuIaAmbbgdxAE1/dlT?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jy26xIolydH5fxZvxQP0AhmzfUfK+E7/Rey923+m?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7ca6111e-a6a7-4db1-5158-08dc7cb1e9d9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DM4PR11MB6020.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 May 2024 11:57:55.5167
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: NktggHkJZb+SOdSajamLIcFiOrtmDOiTzr7cwG4JaucYYR12IM7HEXvGH/q3KWOsRo3A2I2lfW/fzQkQkxzneQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PH7PR11MB6475
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com

On 2024-05-25 at 08:41:28 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-05-24 at 21:40 +0800, Chunxin Zang wrote:
> > I found that some tasks have been running for a long enough time and
> > have become illegal, but they are still not releasing the CPU. This
> > will increase the scheduling delay of other processes. Therefore, I
> > tried checking the current process in wakeup_preempt and entity_tick,
> > and if it is illegal, reschedule that cfs queue.
> 
> My box gave making the XXX below reality a two thumbs up when fiddling
> with the original unfettered and a bit harsh RUN_TO_PARITY.
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 8a5b1ae0aa55..922834f172b0 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -8413,12 +8413,13 @@ static void check_preempt_wakeup_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int
>  	update_curr(cfs_rq);
> 
>  	/*
> -	 * XXX pick_eevdf(cfs_rq) != se ?
> +	 * Run @curr until it is no longer our best option.  Basing the preempt
> +	 * decision on @curr reselection puts any previous decisions back on the
> +	 * table in context "now", including granularity preservation decisions
> +	 * by RUN_TO_PARITY.
>  	 */
> -	if (pick_eevdf(cfs_rq) == pse)
> -		goto preempt;
> -
> -	return;
> +	if (pick_eevdf(cfs_rq) == se)
> +		return;
>

I suppose this change benefits the overloaded scenario:
neither current nor the wakee is the best one.

before: current continues to run.
after: best se in the tree preempts current.

hackbench -g 12 -l 1000000000 & (480 tasks, 2x of the CPUs)

cyclictest --mlockall -D 1m -q
before:
T: 0 (15983) P: 0 I:1000 C:  43054 Min:     11 Act:  144 Avg:  627 Max:   11446

after:
T: 0 (16473) P: 0 I:1000 C:  49822 Min:      7 Act:  160 Avg:  388 Max:   10190

Min, Avg, Max latency all decreased.

thanks,
Chenyu