[PATCH] fix scheduler regression from "sched/fair: Rework load_balance()"
From: Chris Mason
Date: Fri Oct 23 2020 - 19:56:41 EST
Hi everyone,
We’re validating a new kernel in the fleet, and compared with v5.2,
performance is ~2-3% lower for some of our workloads. After some
digging, Johannes found that our involuntary context switch rate was ~2x
higher, and we were leaving a CPU idle a higher percentage of the time,
even though the workload was trying to saturate the system.
We were able to reproduce the problem with schbench, and Johannes
bisected down to:
commit 0b0695f2b34a4afa3f6e9aa1ff0e5336d8dad912
Author: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Oct 18 15:26:31 2019 +0200
sched/fair: Rework load_balance()
Our working theory is the load balancing changes are leaving processes
behind busy CPUs instead of moving them onto idle ones. I made a few
schbench modifications to make this easier to demonstrate:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/schbench.git/
My VM has 40 cpus (20 cores, 2 threads per core), and my schbench
command line is:
schbench -t 20 -r 0 -c 1000000 -s 1000 -i 30 -z 120
This has two message threads, and 20 workers per message thread. Once
woken up, the workers think for a full second, which means you’ll have
some long latencies if you’re stuck behind one of these workers in the
runqueue. The message thread does a little bit of work and then sleeps,
so we end up with 40 threads hammering full blast on the CPU and 2
threads popping in and out of idle.
schbench times the delay from when a message thread wakes a worker to
when the worker runs. On a good kernel, the output looks like this:
Latency percentiles (usec) runtime 1290 (s) (3280 total samples)
50.0th: 155 (1653 samples)
75.0th: 189 (808 samples)
90.0th: 216 (501 samples)
95.0th: 227 (163 samples)
*99.0th: 256 (123 samples)
99.5th: 1510 (16 samples)
99.9th: 3132 (13 samples)
min=21, max=3286
With 0b0695f2b34a, we get this:
Latency percentiles (usec) runtime 1440 (s) (4480 total samples)
50.0th: 147 (2261 samples)
75.0th: 182 (1116 samples)
90.0th: 205 (671 samples)
95.0th: 224 (215 samples)
*99.0th: 12240 (173 samples) <—— much higher p99 and up
99.5th: 12752 (22 samples)
99.9th: 13104 (18 samples)
min=21, max=13172
Since the idea is to fully load the machine with schbench, use schbench
-t <your_num_cpus/2>, and make sure the box doesn’t have other stuff
running in the background. I used a VM because it ended up giving more
consistent results on our kernel test machines, which have some periodic
noise running in the background.
We’ve tried a few different approaches, but don’t quite have a solid
fix yet. I thought I’d kick off the discussion with my most useful
hunks so far:
diff a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
-chris