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 */
