lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched/fair: vruntime should normalize when switching from fair
From
Date
On 09/27/2018 03:19 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2018 at 06:38, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 09/26/2018 11:50 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> Hi Dietmar,
>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 22:55, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 08/27/2018 12:14 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 02:24:48PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/24/2018 02:47 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 08/17/2018 11:27 AM, Steve Muckle wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>>>>>> - later, when the prio is deboosted and the task is moved back
>>>>>>>>>> to the fair class, the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to
>>>>>>>>>> the task's vruntime, even though it wasn't subtracted earlier.
>>>
>>> Could you point out when the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to the
>>> task's vruntime in your *later* scenario? attach_task_cfs_rq will not
>>> do that the same reason as detach_task_cfs_rq. fair task's
>>> sched_remote_wakeup is false which results in vruntime will not be
>>> renormalized in enqueue_entity.
>>
>> The cfs_rq->min_vruntime is still added to the se->vruntime in
>> enqueue_task_fair().
>
> I understand what your patch done,

It's not my patch ;-) I just helped to find out under which
circumstances this issue can happen.

> On your CPU4:
> scheduler_ipi()
> -> sched_ttwu_pending()
> -> ttwu_do_activate() => p->sched_remote_wakeup should be
> false, so ENQUEUE_WAKEUP is set, ENQUEUE_MIGRATED is not
> -> ttwu_activate()
> -> activate_task()
> -> enqueue_task()
> -> enqueue_task_fair()
> -> enqueue_entity()
> bool renorm = !(flags &
> ENQUEUE_WAKEUP) || (flags & ENQUEUE_MIGRATE)
> so renorm is false in enqueue_entity(), why you mentioned that the
> cfs_rq->min_vruntime is still added to the se->vruntime in
> enqueue_task_fair()?

Maybe this is a misunderstanding on my side but didn't you asked me to
'... Could you point out when the fair rq's min_vruntime is added to the
task's vruntime in your *later* scenario? ...'

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-27 15:23    [W:0.305 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site