Re: [RFCv5 PATCH 38/46] sched: scheduler-driven cpu frequency selection

[Juri Lelli]

On 15/08/15 13:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 07:24:21PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq_sched.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_sched.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..5020f24
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq_sched.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,308 @@
>> +/*
>> + *  Copyright (C)  2015 Michael Turquette <mturquette@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/kthread.h>
>> +#include <linux/percpu.h>
>> +#include <linux/irq_work.h>
>> +
>> +#include "sched.h"
>> +
>> +#define THROTTLE_NSEC		50000000 /* 50ms default */
>> +
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, pcpu_capacity);
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpufreq_policy *, pcpu_policy);
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * gov_data - per-policy data internal to the governor
>> + * @throttle: next throttling period expiry. Derived from throttle_nsec
>> + * @throttle_nsec: throttle period length in nanoseconds
>> + * @task: worker thread for dvfs transition that may block/sleep
>> + * @irq_work: callback used to wake up worker thread
>> + * @freq: new frequency stored in *_sched_update_cpu and used in *_sched_thread
>> + *
>> + * struct gov_data is the per-policy cpufreq_sched-specific data structure. A
>> + * per-policy instance of it is created when the cpufreq_sched governor receives
>> + * the CPUFREQ_GOV_START condition and a pointer to it exists in the gov_data
>> + * member of struct cpufreq_policy.
>> + *
>> + * Readers of this data must call down_read(policy->rwsem). Writers must
>> + * call down_write(policy->rwsem).
>> + */
>> +struct gov_data {
>> +	ktime_t throttle;
>> +	unsigned int throttle_nsec;
>> +	struct task_struct *task;
>> +	struct irq_work irq_work;
>> +	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>> +	unsigned int freq;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static void cpufreq_sched_try_driver_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int freq)
>> +{
>> +	struct gov_data *gd = policy->governor_data;
>> +
>> +	/* avoid race with cpufreq_sched_stop */
>> +	if (!down_write_trylock(&policy->rwsem))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	__cpufreq_driver_target(policy, freq, CPUFREQ_RELATION_L);
>> +
>> +	gd->throttle = ktime_add_ns(ktime_get(), gd->throttle_nsec);
>> +	up_write(&policy->rwsem);
>> +}
> 
> That locking truly is disgusting.. why can't we change that?
> 
>> +static int cpufreq_sched_thread(void *data)
>> +{
> 
>> +
>> +	ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(gd->task, policy->related_cpus);
> 
> That's not sufficient, you really want to have called kthread_bind() on
> these threads, otherwise userspace can change affinity on you.
> 
>> +
>> +	do_exit(0);
> 
> I thought kthreads only needed to return...
> 
>> +}
> 
>> +void cpufreq_sched_set_cap(int cpu, unsigned long capacity)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int freq_new, cpu_tmp;
>> +	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
>> +	struct gov_data *gd;
>> +	unsigned long capacity_max = 0;
>> +
>> +	/* update per-cpu capacity request */
>> +	__this_cpu_write(pcpu_capacity, capacity);
>> +
>> +	policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> 
> So this does a down_read_trylock(&cpufreq_rwsem) and a
> read_lock_irqsave(&cpufreq_driver_lock), all while holding scheduler
> locks.
> 
>> +	if (cpufreq_driver_might_sleep())
>> +		irq_work_queue_on(&gd->irq_work, cpu);
>> +	else
>> +		cpufreq_sched_try_driver_target(policy, freq_new);
> 
> This will then do a down_write_trylock(&policy->rwsem)
> 
>> +
>> +out:
>> +	cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> 
>> +	return;
>> +}
> 
> That is just insane... surely we can replace all that with a wee bit of
> RCU logic.
> 
> So something like:
> 
> DEFINE_MUTEX(cpufreq_mutex);
> struct cpufreq_driver *cpufreq_driver;
> 
> struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_cpu_get(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> 	struct cpufreq_driver *driver;
> 	struct cpufreq_policy *policy;
> 
> 	rcu_read_lock();
> 	driver = rcu_dereference(cpufreq_driver);
> 	if (!driver)
> 		goto err;
> 
> 	policy = per_cpu_ptr(driver->policy, cpu);
> 	if (!policy)
> 		goto err;
> 
> 	return policy;
> 
> err:
> 	rcu_read_unlock();
> 	return NULL;
> }
> 
> 
> void cpufreq_cpu_put(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
> 	rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> 
> 
> 
> void cpufreq_set_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver)
> {
> 	mutex_lock(&cpufreq_mutex);
> 
> 	rcu_assign_pointer(cpufreq_driver, NULL);
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * Wait for everyone to observe the lack of driver; iow. until
> 	 * its unused.
> 	 */
> 	synchronize_rcu();
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * Now that ye olde driver be gone, install a new one.
> 	 */
> 	if (driver)
> 		rcu_assign_pointer(cpufreq_driver, driver);
> 
> 	mutex_unlock(&cpufreq_mutex);
> }
> 
> 
> No need for cpufreq_rwsem or cpufreq_driver_lock..
> 
> 
> Hmm?
> 

So, just to recall what we discussed at LPC (I have Mike's slides
at hand :-)). It seems that key points are:

1- we agreed that locking in cpufreq core has to change as we
   have to access it from scheduler hot-paths; what Peter is
   proposing above looks viable to me, what others (way more
   confident then me with cpufreq inners) say?

2- the interface has to be extended as we have to let other
   scheduling classes drive freq selection too; I guess that how
   we do aggregation depends on the nature of sched classes,
   but we didn't really reach any sort of agreement here; is
   this anyway something we can focus on after fixing locking?

3- the interface should also support peripheral devices; this
   seems a interesting feature to have, but how about we postpone
   it after we've got previous points right?

What did I miss of crucial? :-)

Best,

- Juri

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/