lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 00/10] steal tasks to improve CPU utilization
From
Date
On 12/10/2018 12:08 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 17:33, Vincent Guittot
> <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 17:29, Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/10/2018 11:10 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>> Hi Steven,
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 22:38, Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When a CPU has no more CFS tasks to run, and idle_balance() fails to
>>>>> find a task, then attempt to steal a task from an overloaded CPU in the
>>>>> same LLC. Maintain and use a bitmap of overloaded CPUs to efficiently
>>>>> identify candidates. To minimize search time, steal the first migratable
>>>>> task that is found when the bitmap is traversed. For fairness, search
>>>>> for migratable tasks on an overloaded CPU in order of next to run.
>>>>>
>>>>> This simple stealing yields a higher CPU utilization than idle_balance()
>>>>> alone, because the search is cheap, so it may be called every time the CPU
>>>>> is about to go idle. idle_balance() does more work because it searches
>>>>> widely for the busiest queue, so to limit its CPU consumption, it declines
>>>>> to search if the system is too busy. Simple stealing does not offload the
>>>>> globally busiest queue, but it is much better than running nothing at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> The bitmap of overloaded CPUs is a new type of sparse bitmap, designed to
>>>>> reduce cache contention vs the usual bitmap when many threads concurrently
>>>>> set, clear, and visit elements.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patch 1 defines the sparsemask type and its operations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patches 2, 3, and 4 implement the bitmap of overloaded CPUs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patches 5 and 6 refactor existing code for a cleaner merge of later
>>>>> patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patches 7 and 8 implement task stealing using the overloaded CPUs bitmap.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patch 9 disables stealing on systems with more than 2 NUMA nodes for the
>>>>> time being because of performance regressions that are not due to stealing
>>>>> per-se. See the patch description for details.
>>>>>
>>>>> Patch 10 adds schedstats for comparing the new behavior to the old, and
>>>>> provided as a convenience for developers only, not for integration.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch series is based on kernel 4.20.0-rc1. It compiles, boots, and
>>>>> runs with/without each of CONFIG_SCHED_SMT, CONFIG_SMP, CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG,
>>>>> and CONFIG_PREEMPT. It runs without error with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT +
>>>>> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG + CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC + CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES +
>>>>> CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK + CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP. CPU hot plug and CPU
>>>>> bandwidth control were tested.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stealing improves utilization with only a modest CPU overhead in scheduler
>>>>> code. In the following experiment, hackbench is run with varying numbers
>>>>> of groups (40 tasks per group), and the delta in /proc/schedstat is shown
>>>>> for each run, averaged per CPU, augmented with these non-standard stats:
>>>>>
>>>>> %find - percent of time spent in old and new functions that search for
>>>>> idle CPUs and tasks to steal and set the overloaded CPUs bitmap.
>>>>>
>>>>> steal - number of times a task is stolen from another CPU.
>>>>>
>>>>> X6-2: 1 socket * 10 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 20 CPUs
>>>>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
>>>>> hackbench <grps> process 100000
>>>>> sched_wakeup_granularity_ns=15000000
>>>>>
>>>>> baseline
>>>>> grps time %busy slice sched idle wake %find steal
>>>>> 1 8.084 75.02 0.10 105476 46291 59183 0.31 0
>>>>> 2 13.892 85.33 0.10 190225 70958 119264 0.45 0
>>>>> 3 19.668 89.04 0.10 263896 87047 176850 0.49 0
>>>>> 4 25.279 91.28 0.10 322171 94691 227474 0.51 0
>>>>> 8 47.832 94.86 0.09 630636 144141 486322 0.56 0
>>>>>
>>>>> new
>>>>> grps time %busy slice sched idle wake %find steal %speedup
>>>>> 1 5.938 96.80 0.24 31255 7190 24061 0.63 7433 36.1
>>>>> 2 11.491 99.23 0.16 74097 4578 69512 0.84 19463 20.9
>>>>> 3 16.987 99.66 0.15 115824 1985 113826 0.77 24707 15.8
>>>>> 4 22.504 99.80 0.14 167188 2385 164786 0.75 29353 12.3
>>>>> 8 44.441 99.86 0.11 389153 1616 387401 0.67 38190 7.6
>>>>>
>>>>> Elapsed time improves by 8 to 36%, and CPU busy utilization is up
>>>>> by 5 to 22% hitting 99% for 2 or more groups (80 or more tasks).
>>>>> The cost is at most 0.4% more find time.
>>>>
>>>> I have run some hackbench tests on my hikey arm64 octo cores with your
>>>> patchset. My original intent was to send a tested-by but I have some
>>>> performances regressions.
>>>> This hikey is the smp one and not the asymetric hikey960 that Valentin
>>>> used for his tests
>>>> The sched domain topology is
>>>> domain-0: span=0-3 level=MC and domain-0: span=4-7 level=MC
>>>> domain-1: span=0-7 level=DIE
>>>>
>>>> I have run 12 times hackbench -g $j -P -l 2000 with j equals to 1 2 3 4 8
>>>>
>>>> grps time
>>>> 1 1.396
>>>> 2 2.699
>>>> 3 3.617
>>>> 4 4.498
>>>> 8 7.721
>>>>
>>>> Then after disabling STEAL in sched_feature with echo NO_STEAL >
>>>> /sys/kernel/debug/sched_features , the results become:
>>>> grps time
>>>> 1 1.217
>>>> 2 1.973
>>>> 3 2.855
>>>> 4 3.932
>>>> 8 7.674
>>>>
>>>> I haven't looked in details about some possible reasons of such
>>>> difference yet and haven't collected the stats that you added with
>>>> patch 10.
>>>> Have you got a script to collect and post process them ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Vincent
>>>
>>> Thanks Vincent. What is the value of /proc/sys/kernel/sched_wakeup_granularity_ns?
>>
>> it's 4000000
>>
>>> Try 15000000. Your 8-core system is heavily overloaded with 40 * groups tasks,
>>> and I suspect preemptions are killing performance.
>>
>> ok. I'm going to run the tests with the proposed value
>
> Results look better after changing /proc/sys/kernel/sched_wakeup_granularity_ns
>
> With STEAL
> grps time
> 1 0.869
> 2 1.646
> 3 2.395
> 4 3.163
> 8 6.199
>
> after echo NO_STEAL > /sys/kernel/debug/sched_features
> grps time
> 1 0.928
> 2 1.770
> 3 2.597
> 4 3.407
> 8 6.431
>
> There is a 7% improvement with steal and the larger value for
> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_wakeup_granularity_ns for all groups
> Should we set the STEAL feature disabled by default as this provides
> benefit only when changing sched_wakeup_granularity_ns value from
> default value?

The preemption effect is load dependent, and only bites on heavily loaded
systems with long run queues *and* crazy high context switch rates with
tiny timeslices, like hackbench. STEAL by default, with the default
sched_wakeup_granularity_ns, is suitable for realistic conditions IMO.

Also, the red hat tuned.service sets sched_wakeup_granularity_ns = 15000000.

Independent of this work, we really need another easy to run scheduler benchmark
that is more realistic than hackbench.

- Steve

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-10 18:21    [W:0.055 / U:3.532 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site