From: Valentin Schneider valentin.schneider@arm.com
[ Upstream commit 3f130a37c442d5c4d66531b240ebe9abfef426b5 ]
When load_balance() fails to move some load because of task affinity, we end up increasing sd->balance_interval to delay the next periodic balance in the hopes that next time we look, that annoying pinned task(s) will be gone.
However, idle_balance() pays no attention to sd->balance_interval, yet it will still lead to an increase in balance_interval in case of pinned tasks.
If we're going through several newidle balances (e.g. we have a periodic task), this can lead to a huge increase of the balance_interval in a very small amount of time.
To prevent that, don't increase the balance interval when going through a newidle balance.
This is a similar approach to what is done in commit 58b26c4c0257 ("sched: Increment cache_nice_tries only on periodic lb"), where we disregard newidle balance and rely on periodic balance for more stable results.
Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider valentin.schneider@arm.com Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) peterz@infradead.org Cc: Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com Cc: Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org Cc: Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de Cc: patrick.bellasi@arm.com Cc: vincent.guittot@linaro.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1537974727-30788-2-git-send-email-valentin.schneide... Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar mingo@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 13 +++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index feeb52880d353..67433fbdcb5a4 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -8319,13 +8319,22 @@ static int load_balance(int this_cpu, struct rq *this_rq, sd->nr_balance_failed = 0;
out_one_pinned: + ld_moved = 0; + + /* + * idle_balance() disregards balance intervals, so we could repeatedly + * reach this code, which would lead to balance_interval skyrocketting + * in a short amount of time. Skip the balance_interval increase logic + * to avoid that. + */ + if (env.idle == CPU_NEWLY_IDLE) + goto out; + /* tune up the balancing interval */ if (((env.flags & LBF_ALL_PINNED) && sd->balance_interval < MAX_PINNED_INTERVAL) || (sd->balance_interval < sd->max_interval)) sd->balance_interval *= 2; - - ld_moved = 0; out: return ld_moved; }