From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" rostedt@goodmis.org
This patch has been added to the stable tree. If you have any objections, please let us know.
===============
[ Upstream commit 2317d5f1c34913bac5971d93d69fb6c31bb74670 ]
I was testing Daniel's changes with his test case, and tweaked it a little. Instead of having the runtime equal to the deadline, I increased the deadline ten fold.
Daniel's test case had:
attr.sched_runtime = 2 * 1000 * 1000; /* 2 ms */ attr.sched_deadline = 2 * 1000 * 1000; /* 2 ms */ attr.sched_period = 2 * 1000 * 1000 * 1000; /* 2 s */
To make it more interesting, I changed it to:
attr.sched_runtime = 2 * 1000 * 1000; /* 2 ms */ attr.sched_deadline = 20 * 1000 * 1000; /* 20 ms */ attr.sched_period = 2 * 1000 * 1000 * 1000; /* 2 s */
The results were rather surprising. The behavior that Daniel's patch was fixing came back. The task started using much more than .1% of the CPU. More like 20%.
Looking into this I found that it was due to the dl_entity_overflow() constantly returning true. That's because it uses the relative period against relative runtime vs the absolute deadline against absolute runtime.
runtime / (deadline - t) > dl_runtime / dl_period
There's even a comment mentioning this, and saying that when relative deadline equals relative period, that the equation is the same as using deadline instead of period. That comment is backwards! What we really want is:
runtime / (deadline - t) > dl_runtime / dl_deadline
We care about if the runtime can make its deadline, not its period. And then we can say "when the deadline equals the period, the equation is the same as using dl_period instead of dl_deadline".
After correcting this, now when the task gets enqueued, it can throttle correctly, and Daniel's fix to the throttling of sleeping deadline tasks works even when the runtime and deadline are not the same.
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) rostedt@goodmis.org Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) peterz@infradead.org Reviewed-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira bristot@redhat.com Cc: Juri Lelli juri.lelli@arm.com Cc: Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: Luca Abeni luca.abeni@santannapisa.it Cc: Mike Galbraith efault@gmx.de Cc: Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org Cc: Romulo Silva de Oliveira romulo.deoliveira@ufsc.br Cc: Steven Rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org Cc: Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de Cc: Tommaso Cucinotta tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/02135a27f1ae3fe5fd032568a5a2f370e190e8d7.1488392936... Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar mingo@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin alexander.levin@microsoft.com --- kernel/sched/deadline.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/deadline.c b/kernel/sched/deadline.c index 5e95145088fd..e45d441176a8 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/deadline.c +++ b/kernel/sched/deadline.c @@ -419,13 +419,13 @@ static void replenish_dl_entity(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, * * This function returns true if: * - * runtime / (deadline - t) > dl_runtime / dl_period , + * runtime / (deadline - t) > dl_runtime / dl_deadline , * * IOW we can't recycle current parameters. * - * Notice that the bandwidth check is done against the period. For + * Notice that the bandwidth check is done against the deadline. For * task with deadline equal to period this is the same of using - * dl_deadline instead of dl_period in the equation above. + * dl_period instead of dl_deadline in the equation above. */ static bool dl_entity_overflow(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, struct sched_dl_entity *pi_se, u64 t) @@ -450,7 +450,7 @@ static bool dl_entity_overflow(struct sched_dl_entity *dl_se, * of anything below microseconds resolution is actually fiction * (but still we want to give the user that illusion >;). */ - left = (pi_se->dl_period >> DL_SCALE) * (dl_se->runtime >> DL_SCALE); + left = (pi_se->dl_deadline >> DL_SCALE) * (dl_se->runtime >> DL_SCALE); right = ((dl_se->deadline - t) >> DL_SCALE) * (pi_se->dl_runtime >> DL_SCALE);