Re: [PATCH 0/6] sched/deadline: cpuset: Rework DEADLINE bandwidth restoration

[Waiman Long]

On 4/18/23 10:11, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 03/29/23 14:55, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > Qais reported [1] that iterating over all tasks when rebuilding root
> > domains for finding out which ones are DEADLINE and need their bandwidth
> > correctly restored on such root domains can be a costly operation (10+
> > ms delays on suspend-resume). He proposed we skip rebuilding root
> > domains for certain operations, but that approach seemed arch specific
> > and possibly prone to errors, as paths that ultimately trigger a rebuild
> > might be quite convoluted (thanks Qais for spending time on this!).
> >
> > To fix the problem
> >
> >   01/06 - Rename functions deadline with DEADLINE accounting (cleanup
> >           suggested by Qais) - no functional change
> >   02/06 - Bring back cpuset_mutex (so that we have write access to cpusets
> >           from scheduler operations - and we also fix some problems
> >           associated to percpu_cpuset_rwsem)
> >   03/06 - Keep track of the number of DEADLINE tasks belonging to each cpuset
> >   04/06 - Create DL BW alloc, free & check overflow interface for bulk
> >           bandwidth allocation/removal - no functional change
> >   05/06 - Fix bandwidth allocation handling for cgroup operation
> >           involving multiple tasks
> >   06/06 - Use this information to only perform the costly iteration if
> >           DEADLINE tasks are actually present in the cpuset for which a
> >           corresponding root domain is being rebuilt
> >
> > With respect to the RFC posting [2]
> >
> >   1 - rename DEADLINE bandwidth accounting functions - Qais
> >   2 - call inc/dec_dl_tasks_cs from switched_{to,from}_dl - Qais
> >   3 - fix DEADLINE bandwidth allocation with multiple tasks - Waiman,
> >       contributed by Dietmar
> >
> > This set is also available from
> >
> > https://github.com/jlelli/linux.git deadline/rework-cpusets
> Is this just waiting to be picked up or still there's something to be addressed
> still?

There are some changes to cpuset code recently and so I believe that 
this patch series may need to be refreshed to reconcile the changes.

Thanks,
Longman