sched/fair: Add over-utilization/tipping point indicator
Energy-aware scheduling is only meant to be active while the system is _not_ over-utilized. That is, there are spare cycles available to shift tasks around based on their actual utilization to get a more energy-efficient task distribution without depriving any tasks. When above the tipping point task placement is done the traditional way based on load_avg, spreading the tasks across as many cpus as possible based on priority scaled load to preserve smp_nice. Below the tipping point we want to use util_avg instead. We need to define a criteria for when we make the switch. The util_avg for each cpu converges towards 100% regardless of how many additional tasks we may put on it. If we define over-utilized as: sum_{cpus}(rq.cfs.avg.util_avg) + margin > sum_{cpus}(rq.capacity) some individual cpus may be over-utilized running multiple tasks even when the above condition is false. That should be okay as long as we try to spread the tasks out to avoid per-cpu over-utilization as much as possible and if all tasks have the _same_ priority. If the latter isn't true, we have to consider priority to preserve smp_nice. For example, we could have n_cpus nice=-10 util_avg=55% tasks and n_cpus/2 nice=0 util_avg=60% tasks. Balancing based on util_avg we are likely to end up with nice=-10 tasks sharing cpus and nice=0 tasks getting their own as we 1.5*n_cpus tasks in total and 55%+55% is less over-utilized than 55%+60% for those cpus that have to be shared. The system utilization is only 85% of the system capacity, but we are breaking smp_nice. To be sure not to break smp_nice, we have defined over-utilization conservatively as when any cpu in the system is fully utilized at its highest frequency instead: cpu_rq(any).cfs.avg.util_avg + margin > cpu_rq(any).capacity IOW, as soon as one cpu is (nearly) 100% utilized, we switch to load_avg to factor in priority to preserve smp_nice. With this definition, we can skip periodic load-balance as no cpu has an always-running task when the system is not over-utilized. All tasks will be periodic and we can balance them at wake-up. This conservative condition does however mean that some scenarios that could benefit from energy-aware decisions even if one cpu is fully utilized would not get those benefits. For systems where some cpus might have reduced capacity on some cpus (RT-pressure and/or big.LITTLE), we want periodic load-balance checks as soon a just a single cpu is fully utilized as it might one of those with reduced capacity and in that case we want to migrate it. [ peterz: Added a comment explaining why new tasks are not accounted during overutilization detection. ] Signed-off-by: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@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> Cc: adharmap@codeaurora.org Cc: chris.redpath@arm.com Cc: currojerez@riseup.net Cc: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com Cc: edubezval@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: javi.merino@kernel.org Cc: joel@joelfernandes.org Cc: juri.lelli@redhat.com Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: pkondeti@codeaurora.org Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: skannan@codeaurora.org Cc: smuckle@google.com Cc: srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com Cc: thara.gopinath@linaro.org Cc: tkjos@google.com Cc: valentin.schneider@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181203095628.11858-13-quentin.perret@arm.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
630246a06a
commit
2802bf3cd9
|
@ -5082,6 +5082,24 @@ static inline void hrtick_update(struct rq *rq)
|
|||
}
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
||||
static inline unsigned long cpu_util(int cpu);
|
||||
static unsigned long capacity_of(int cpu);
|
||||
|
||||
static inline bool cpu_overutilized(int cpu)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return (capacity_of(cpu) * 1024) < (cpu_util(cpu) * capacity_margin);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static inline void update_overutilized_status(struct rq *rq)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (!READ_ONCE(rq->rd->overutilized) && cpu_overutilized(rq->cpu))
|
||||
WRITE_ONCE(rq->rd->overutilized, SG_OVERUTILIZED);
|
||||
}
|
||||
#else
|
||||
static inline void update_overutilized_status(struct rq *rq) { }
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The enqueue_task method is called before nr_running is
|
||||
* increased. Here we update the fair scheduling stats and
|
||||
|
@ -5139,8 +5157,26 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
|
|||
update_cfs_group(se);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (!se)
|
||||
if (!se) {
|
||||
add_nr_running(rq, 1);
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Since new tasks are assigned an initial util_avg equal to
|
||||
* half of the spare capacity of their CPU, tiny tasks have the
|
||||
* ability to cross the overutilized threshold, which will
|
||||
* result in the load balancer ruining all the task placement
|
||||
* done by EAS. As a way to mitigate that effect, do not account
|
||||
* for the first enqueue operation of new tasks during the
|
||||
* overutilized flag detection.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* A better way of solving this problem would be to wait for
|
||||
* the PELT signals of tasks to converge before taking them
|
||||
* into account, but that is not straightforward to implement,
|
||||
* and the following generally works well enough in practice.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (flags & ENQUEUE_WAKEUP)
|
||||
update_overutilized_status(rq);
|
||||
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
hrtick_update(rq);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -7940,6 +7976,9 @@ static inline void update_sg_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
|
|||
if (nr_running > 1)
|
||||
*sg_status |= SG_OVERLOAD;
|
||||
|
||||
if (cpu_overutilized(i))
|
||||
*sg_status |= SG_OVERUTILIZED;
|
||||
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
|
||||
sgs->nr_numa_running += rq->nr_numa_running;
|
||||
sgs->nr_preferred_running += rq->nr_preferred_running;
|
||||
|
@ -8170,8 +8209,15 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sd
|
|||
env->fbq_type = fbq_classify_group(&sds->busiest_stat);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!env->sd->parent) {
|
||||
struct root_domain *rd = env->dst_rq->rd;
|
||||
|
||||
/* update overload indicator if we are at root domain */
|
||||
WRITE_ONCE(env->dst_rq->rd->overload, sg_status & SG_OVERLOAD);
|
||||
WRITE_ONCE(rd->overload, sg_status & SG_OVERLOAD);
|
||||
|
||||
/* Update over-utilization (tipping point, U >= 0) indicator */
|
||||
WRITE_ONCE(rd->overutilized, sg_status & SG_OVERUTILIZED);
|
||||
} else if (sg_status & SG_OVERUTILIZED) {
|
||||
WRITE_ONCE(env->dst_rq->rd->overutilized, SG_OVERUTILIZED);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -8398,6 +8444,14 @@ static struct sched_group *find_busiest_group(struct lb_env *env)
|
|||
* this level.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
update_sd_lb_stats(env, &sds);
|
||||
|
||||
if (static_branch_unlikely(&sched_energy_present)) {
|
||||
struct root_domain *rd = env->dst_rq->rd;
|
||||
|
||||
if (rcu_dereference(rd->pd) && !READ_ONCE(rd->overutilized))
|
||||
goto out_balanced;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
local = &sds.local_stat;
|
||||
busiest = &sds.busiest_stat;
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -9798,6 +9852,7 @@ static void task_tick_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *curr, int queued)
|
|||
task_tick_numa(rq, curr);
|
||||
|
||||
update_misfit_status(curr, rq);
|
||||
update_overutilized_status(task_rq(curr));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -718,6 +718,7 @@ struct perf_domain {
|
|||
|
||||
/* Scheduling group status flags */
|
||||
#define SG_OVERLOAD 0x1 /* More than one runnable task on a CPU. */
|
||||
#define SG_OVERUTILIZED 0x2 /* One or more CPUs are over-utilized. */
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* We add the notion of a root-domain which will be used to define per-domain
|
||||
|
@ -741,6 +742,9 @@ struct root_domain {
|
|||
*/
|
||||
int overload;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Indicate one or more cpus over-utilized (tipping point) */
|
||||
int overutilized;
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* The bit corresponding to a CPU gets set here if such CPU has more
|
||||
* than one runnable -deadline task (as it is below for RT tasks).
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue