Re: [PATCH 4/6 v5] sched: propagate load during synchronous attach/detach

From: Dietmar Eggemann
Date: Fri Oct 21 2016 - 08:19:09 EST


On 10/17/2016 10:14 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
When a task moves from/to a cfs_rq, we set a flag which is then used to
propagate the change at parent level (sched_entity and cfs_rq) during
next update. If the cfs_rq is throttled, the flag will stay pending until
the cfs_rw is unthrottled.

minor nit:

s/cfs_rw/cfs_rq

[...]

@@ -8704,6 +8867,22 @@ static void detach_task_cfs_rq(struct task_struct *p)
update_load_avg(se, 0);
detach_entity_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
update_tg_load_avg(cfs_rq, false);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
+ /*
+ * Propagate the detach across the tg tree to make it visible to the
+ * root
+ */
+ se = se->parent;
+ for_each_sched_entity(se) {
+ cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
+
+ if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
+ break;
+
+ update_load_avg(se, UPDATE_TG);
+ }
+#endif
}

static void attach_entity_cfs_rq(struct sched_entity *se)
@@ -8722,6 +8901,22 @@ static void attach_entity_cfs_rq(struct sched_entity *se)
update_load_avg(se, sched_feat(ATTACH_AGE_LOAD) ? 0 : SKIP_AGE_LOAD);
attach_entity_load_avg(cfs_rq, se);
update_tg_load_avg(cfs_rq, false);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
+ /*
+ * Propagate the attach across the tg tree to make it visible to the
+ * root
+ */
+ se = se->parent;
+ for_each_sched_entity(se) {
+ cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);
+
+ if (cfs_rq_throttled(cfs_rq))
+ break;
+
+ update_load_avg(se, UPDATE_TG);
+ }
+#endif
}

The 'detach across' and 'attach across' in detach_task_cfs_rq() and attach_entity_cfs_rq() do the same so couldn't you not create a function propagate_foo() for it? This would avoid this ifdef as well.

You could further create in your '[PATCH 1/6 v5] sched: factorize attach entity':

detach_entity_cfs_rq() {
update_load_avg()
detach_entity_load_avg()
update_tg_load_avg()
propagate_load_avg()
}

and then we would have:

attach_task_cfs_rq() -> attach_entity_cfs_rq() -> propagate_foo()
detach_task_cfs_rq() -> detach_entity_cfs_rq() -> propagate_foo()

I guess you didn't because it would be only called one time but this symmetric approaches are easier to remember (at least for me).

[...]