On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 01:24:21PM +0100, Tobias Huschle wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 10:23:18AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > kworkers are typically not in cgroups and are part of the root cgroup,
> > but what's a vhost and where does it live?
>
> The qemu instances of the two KVM guests are placed into cgroups.
> The vhosts run within the context of these qemu instances (4 threads per guest).
> So they are also put into those cgroups.
>
> I'll answer the other questions you brought up as well, but I guess that one
> is most critical:
>
> >
> > After confirming both tasks are indeed in the same cgroup ofcourse,
> > because if they're not, vruntime will be meaningless to compare and we
> > should look elsewhere.
>
> In that case we probably have to go with elsewhere ... which is good to know.
Ah, so if this is a cgroup issue, it might be worth trying this patch
that we have in tip/sched/urgent.
I'll try and read the rest of the email a little later, gotta run
errands first.
---
commit eab03c23c2a162085b13200d7942fc5a00b5ccc8
Author: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue Nov 7 17:05:07 2023 +0800
sched/eevdf: Fix vruntime adjustment on reweight
vruntime of the (on_rq && !0-lag) entity needs to be adjusted when
it gets re-weighted, and the calculations can be simplified based
on the fact that re-weight won't change the w-average of all the
entities. Please check the proofs in comments.
But adjusting vruntime can also cause position change in RB-tree
hence require re-queue to fix up which might be costly. This might
be avoided by deferring adjustment to the time the entity actually
leaves tree (dequeue/pick), but that will negatively affect task
selection and probably not good enough either.
Fixes: 147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20231107090510.71322-2-wuyun.abel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 2048138ce54b..025d90925bf6 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -3666,41 +3666,140 @@ static inline void
dequeue_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se) { }
#endif
+static void reweight_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
+ unsigned long weight)
+{
+ unsigned long old_weight = se->load.weight;
+ u64 avruntime = avg_vruntime(cfs_rq);
+ s64 vlag, vslice;
+
+ /*
+ * VRUNTIME
+ * ========
+ *
+ * COROLLARY #1: The virtual runtime of the entity needs to be
+ * adjusted if re-weight at !0-lag point.
+ *
+ * Proof: For contradiction assume this is not true, so we can
+ * re-weight without changing vruntime at !0-lag point.
+ *
+ * Weight VRuntime Avg-VRuntime
+ * before w v V
+ * after w' v' V'
+ *
+ * Since lag needs to be preserved through re-weight:
+ *
+ * lag = (V - v)*w = (V'- v')*w', where v = v'
+ * ==> V' = (V - v)*w/w' + v (1)
+ *
+ * Let W be the total weight of the entities before reweight,
+ * since V' is the new weighted average of entities:
+ *
+ * V' = (WV + w'v - wv) / (W + w' - w) (2)
+ *
+ * by using (1) & (2) we obtain:
+ *
+ * (WV + w'v - wv) / (W + w' - w) = (V - v)*w/w' + v
+ * ==> (WV-Wv+Wv+w'v-wv)/(W+w'-w) = (V - v)*w/w' + v
+ * ==> (WV - Wv)/(W + w' - w) + v = (V - v)*w/w' + v
+ * ==> (V - v)*W/(W + w' - w) = (V - v)*w/w' (3)
+ *
+ * Since we are doing at !0-lag point which means V != v, we
+ * can simplify (3):
+ *
+ * ==> W / (W + w' - w) = w / w'
+ * ==> Ww' = Ww + ww' - ww
+ * ==> W * (w' - w) = w * (w' - w)
+ * ==> W = w (re-weight indicates w' != w)
+ *
+ * So the cfs_rq contains only one entity, hence vruntime of
+ * the entity @v should always equal to the cfs_rq's weighted
+ * average vruntime @V, which means we will always re-weight
+ * at 0-lag point, thus breach assumption. Proof completed.
+ *
+ *
+ * COROLLARY #2: Re-weight does NOT affect weighted average
+ * vruntime of all the entities.
+ *
+ * Proof: According to corollary #1, Eq. (1) should be:
+ *
+ * (V - v)*w = (V' - v')*w'
+ * ==> v' = V' - (V - v)*w/w' (4)
+ *
+ * According to the weighted average formula, we have:
+ *
+ * V' = (WV - wv + w'v') / (W - w + w')
+ * = (WV - wv + w'(V' - (V - v)w/w')) / (W - w + w')
+ * = (WV - wv + w'V' - Vw + wv) / (W - w + w')
+ * = (WV + w'V' - Vw) / (W - w + w')
+ *
+ * ==> V'*(W - w + w') = WV + w'V' - Vw
+ * ==> V' * (W - w) = (W - w) * V (5)
+ *
+ * If the entity is the only one in the cfs_rq, then reweight
+ * always occurs at 0-lag point, so V won't change. Or else
+ * there are other entities, hence W != w, then Eq. (5) turns
+ * into V' = V. So V won't change in either case, proof done.
+ *
+ *
+ * So according to corollary #1 & #2, the effect of re-weight
+ * on vruntime should be:
+ *
+ * v' = V' - (V - v) * w / w' (4)
+ * = V - (V - v) * w / w'
+ * = V - vl * w / w'
+ * = V - vl'
+ */
+ if (avruntime != se->vruntime) {
+ vlag = (s64)(avruntime - se->vruntime);
+ vlag = div_s64(vlag * old_weight, weight);
+ se->vruntime = avruntime - vlag;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * DEADLINE
+ * ========
+ *
+ * When the weight changes, the virtual time slope changes and
+ * we should adjust the relative virtual deadline accordingly.
+ *
+ * d' = v' + (d - v)*w/w'
+ * = V' - (V - v)*w/w' + (d - v)*w/w'
+ * = V - (V - v)*w/w' + (d - v)*w/w'
+ * = V + (d - V)*w/w'
+ */
+ vslice = (s64)(se->deadline - avruntime);
+ vslice = div_s64(vslice * old_weight, weight);
+ se->deadline = avruntime + vslice;
+}
+
static void reweight_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
unsigned long weight)
{
- unsigned long old_weight = se->load.weight;
+ bool curr = cfs_rq->curr == se;
if (se->on_rq) {
/* commit outstanding execution time */
- if (cfs_rq->curr == se)
+ if (curr)
update_curr(cfs_rq);
else
- avg_vruntime_sub(cfs_rq, se);
+ __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
update_load_sub(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
}
dequeue_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
- update_load_set(&se->load, weight);
-
if (!se->on_rq) {
/*
* Because we keep se->vlag = V - v_i, while: lag_i = w_i*(V - v_i),
* we need to scale se->vlag when w_i changes.
*/
- se->vlag = div_s64(se->vlag * old_weight, weight);
+ se->vlag = div_s64(se->vlag * se->load.weight, weight);
} else {
- s64 deadline = se->deadline - se->vruntime;
- /*
- * When the weight changes, the virtual time slope changes and
- * we should adjust the relative virtual deadline accordingly.
- */
- deadline = div_s64(deadline * old_weight, weight);
- se->deadline = se->vruntime + deadline;
- if (se != cfs_rq->curr)
- min_deadline_cb_propagate(&se->run_node, NULL);
+ reweight_eevdf(cfs_rq, se, weight);
}
+ update_load_set(&se->load, weight);
+
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
do {
u32 divider = get_pelt_divider(&se->avg);
@@ -3712,8 +3811,17 @@ static void reweight_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
enqueue_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
if (se->on_rq) {
update_load_add(&cfs_rq->load, se->load.weight);
- if (cfs_rq->curr != se)
- avg_vruntime_add(cfs_rq, se);
+ if (!curr) {
+ /*
+ * The entity's vruntime has been adjusted, so let's check
+ * whether the rq-wide min_vruntime needs updated too. Since
+ * the calculations above require stable min_vruntime rather
+ * than up-to-date one, we do the update at the end of the
+ * reweight process.
+ */
+ __enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
+ update_min_vruntime(cfs_rq);
+ }
}
}
@@ -3857,14 +3965,11 @@ static void update_cfs_group(struct sched_entity *se)
#ifndef CONFIG_SMP
shares = READ_ONCE(gcfs_rq->tg->shares);
-
- if (likely(se->load.weight == shares))
- return;
#else
- shares = calc_group_shares(gcfs_rq);
+ shares = calc_group_shares(gcfs_rq);
#endif
-
- reweight_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se, shares);
+ if (unlikely(se->load.weight != shares))
+ reweight_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se, shares);
}
#else /* CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED */
