Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] Sched/fair: Block nohz tick_stop when cfs bandwidth in use

[Phil Auld]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 12:49:34AM +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 09:33:57AM -0400, Phil Auld wrote:
> > CFS bandwidth limits and NOHZ full don't play well together.  Tasks
> > can easily run well past their quotas before a remote tick does
> > accounting.  This leads to long, multi-period stalls before such
> > tasks can run again. Currently, when presented with these conflicting
> > requirements the scheduler is favoring nohz_full and letting the tick
> > be stopped. However, nohz tick stopping is already best-effort, there
> > are a number of conditions that can prevent it, whereas cfs runtime
> > bandwidth is expected to be enforced.
> > 
> > Make the scheduler favor bandwidth over stopping the tick by setting
> > TICK_DEP_BIT_SCHED when the only running task is a cfs task with
> > runtime limit enabled. We use cfs_b->hierarchical_quota to
> > determine if the task requires the tick.
> > 
> > Add check in pick_next_task_fair() as well since that is where
> > we have a handle on the task that is actually going to be running.
> > 
> > Add check in sched_can_stop_tick() to cover some edge cases such
> > as nr_running going from 2->1 and the 1 remains the running task.
> 
> These appear fine to me, except:
>
> > Add sched_feat HZ_BW (off by default) to control the tick_stop
> > behavior.
> 
> What was the thinking here? This means nobody will be using this -- why
> would you want this default disabled?
> 

That was just a hedge in case it caused issues. I'd probably have had to
enable it in RHEL anyway. Using a feature was to make it inocuous when
disabled.  Would you prefer me to enable it or remove the sched_feat
entirely? (or do you want to just switch that to true when you apply it?)

Thanks,
Phil

--