Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1309969
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth |
| Date | 2016-01-15 10:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qR8oG-3Fn-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qQS0x-uX-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qQSae-yO-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <qQWdQ-3jT-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <qR7VE-3qX-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:21:17AM +0100, Luca Abeni wrote: > On 01/14/2016 08:59 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 04:24:53PM +0100, Luca Abeni wrote: > >>Original GRUB tends to reclaim 100% of the CPU time... And this allows a > >>"CPU hog" (i.e., a busy loop) to starve non-deadline tasks. > >>To address this issue, allow the scheduler to reclaim only a specified > >>fraction of CPU time. > >>NOTE: the fraction of CPU time that cannot be reclaimed is currently > >>hardcoded as (1 << 20) / 10 -> 90%, but it must be made configurable! > > > >So the alternative is an explicit SCHED_OTHER server which is > >configurable. > Yes, I have thought about something similar (actually, this is the strategy > I implemented in my first CBS/GRUB scheduler. With the "old" 2.4 scheduler, > this was easier :). > But I think the solution I implemented in this patch is much simpler (it > just requires a very simple modification to grub_reclaim()) and is more > elegant from the theoretical point of view. It is certainly simpler, agreed. The trouble is with interfaces. Once we expose them we're stuck with them. And from that POV I think an explicit SCHED_OTHER server (or a minimum budget for a slack time scheme) makes more sense. It provides this same information while also providing more benefit, no? > >That would maybe fit in nicely with the DL based FIFO/RR servers from > >this other pending project. > Yes, this reminds me about the half-finished patch for RT throttling using > SCHED_DEADLINE... But that patch needs much more work IMHO. IIRC two years ago at RTLWS there was a presentation that the SMP issues were 'solved' and they would be posting the patches 'soon'.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it> - 2016-01-14 16:40 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-14 21:00 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it> - 2016-01-15 09:30 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-15 10:00 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it> - 2016-01-15 10:50 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth luca abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it> - 2016-01-26 14:00 +0100
Re: [RFC 8/8] Do not reclaim the whole CPU bandwidth Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-27 15:50 +0100
csiph-web