On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 1:13 PM Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/23 16:06, Hao Luo wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 12:09 PM Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On 3/7/23 14:56, Hao Luo wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 2:15 PM Qais Yousef <qyousef@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> Commit f9a25f776d78 ("cpusets: Rebuild root domain deadline accounting information")
> >>>> enabled rebuilding root domain on cpuset and hotplug operations to
> >>>> correct deadline accounting.
> >>>>
> >>>> Rebuilding root domain is a slow operation and we see 10+ of ms delays
> >>>> on suspend-resume because of that (worst case captures 20ms which
> >>>> happens often).
> >>>>
> >>>> Since nothing is expected to change on suspend-resume operation; skip
> >>>> rebuilding the root domains to regain the some of the time lost.
> >>>>
> >>>> Achieve this by refactoring the code to pass whether dl accoutning needs
> >>>> an update to rebuild_sched_domains(). And while at it, rename
> >>>> rebuild_root_domains() to update_dl_rd_accounting() which I believe is
> >>>> a more representative name since we are not really rebuilding the root
> >>>> domains, but rather updating dl accounting at the root domain.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some users of rebuild_sched_domains() will skip dl accounting update
> >>>> now:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Update sched domains when relaxing the domain level in cpuset
> >>>> which only impacts searching level in load balance
> >>>> * update sched domains when cpufreq governor changes and we need
> >>>> to create the perf domains
> >>>>
> >>>> Users in arch/x86 and arch/s390 are left with the old behavior.
> >>>>
> >>>> Debugged-by: Rick Yiu <rickyiu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef (Google) <qyousef@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>> Hi Qais,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for reporting this. We observed the same issue in our
> >>> production environment. Rebuild_root_domains() is also called under
> >>> cpuset_write_resmask, which handles writing to cpuset.cpus. Under
> >>> production workloads, on a 4.15 kernel, we observed the median latency
> >>> of writing cpuset.cpus at 3ms, p99 at 7ms. Now the median becomes
> >>> 60ms, p99 at >100ms. Writing cpuset.cpus is a fairly frequent and
> >>> critical path in production, but blindly traversing every task in the
> >>> system is not scalable. And its cost is really unnecessary for users
> >>> who don't use deadline tasks at all.
> >> The rebuild_root_domains() function shouldn't be called when updating
> >> cpuset.cpus unless it is a partition root. Is it?
> >>
> > I think it's because we were using the legacy hierarchy. I'm not
> > familiar with cpuset partition though.
>
> In legacy hierarchy, changing cpuset.cpus shouldn't lead to the calling
> of rebuild_root_domains() unless you play with cpuset.sched_load_balance
> file by changing it to 0 in the right cpusets. If you are touching
> cpuset.sched_load_balance, you shouldn't change cpuset.cpus that often.
>
Actually, I think it's the opposite. If I understand the code
correctly[1], it looks like rebuild_root_domains is called when
LOAD_BALANCE _is_ set and sched_load_balance is 1 by default. Is that
condition a bug?
I don't think we updated cpuset.sched_load_balance.
[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c#L1677
