Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] sched/fair: Feature to suppress Fair Server for NOHZ_FULL isolation

[Aaron Tomlin]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 05:38:17PM +0100, Daniel Vacek wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 at 16:38, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 06/01/26 14:37, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
> > > On 1/6/26 9:12 AM, Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> > >> Hi Ingo, Peter, Juri, Vincent,
> > >>
> > >> This patch introduces a new scheduler feature, RT_SUPPRESS_FAIR_SERVER,
> > >> designed to ensure strict NOHZ_FULL isolation for SCHED_FIFO workloads,
> > >> particularly in the presence of resident CFS tasks.
> > >>
> > >> In strictly partitioned, latency-critical environments (such as High
> > >> Frequency Trading platforms) administrators frequently employ fully
> > >> adaptive-tick CPUs to execute pinned SCHED_FIFO workloads. The fundamental
> > >> requirement is "zero OS noise"; specifically, the scheduler clock-tick must
> > >> remain suppressed ("offloaded"), given that standard SCHED_FIFO semantics
> > >> dictate no forced preemption between tasks of identical priority.
> > >
> > > If all your SCHED_FIFO is pinned and their scheduling decisions
> > > are managed in userspace, using isolcpus would offer you better
> > > isolations compared to nohz_full.
> > >
> >
> > Right, that's the part I don't get; why not use CPU isolation / cpusets to
> > isolate the CPUs running those NOHZ_FULL applications? Regardless of the
> > deadline server, if CFS tasks get scheduled on the same CPU as your
> > latency-sensitive tasks then something's not right.
> 
> Some kernel workers and threaded interrupt handlers can be local/pinned, right?
> 
> For example this is usually (was often?) visible with DPDK
> applications like FlexRAN/OpenRAN, etc.
> And Aaron has mentioned high speed trading before.

Hi Valentin, Daniel,

I must offer my apologies for the confusion; I neglected to mention in the
cover letter that isolcpus=domain is indeed deployed in this environment.

Consequently, standard load-balancing is effectively disabled. You are
quite right that standard CFS tasks should not appear on these cores; any
SCHED_NORMAL entities that do appear are not the result of leakage or
misconfiguration, but are rather unavoidable CPU-specific kthreads or
explicit migrations initiated by user-space.


Kind regards,
-- 
Aaron Tomlin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature