6.16-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Andrea Righi arighi@nvidia.com
commit 0b47b6c3543efd65f2e620e359b05f4938314fbd upstream.
scx_bpf_reenqueue_local() can be called from ops.cpu_release() when a CPU is taken by a higher scheduling class to give tasks queued to the CPU's local DSQ a chance to be migrated somewhere else, instead of waiting indefinitely for that CPU to become available again.
In doing so, we decided to skip migration-disabled tasks, under the assumption that they cannot be migrated anyway.
However, when a higher scheduling class preempts a CPU, the running task is always inserted at the head of the local DSQ as a migration-disabled task. This means it is always skipped by scx_bpf_reenqueue_local(), and ends up being confined to the same CPU even if that CPU is heavily contended by other higher scheduling class tasks.
As an example, let's consider the following scenario:
$ schedtool -a 0,1, -e yes > /dev/null $ sudo schedtool -F -p 99 -a 0, -e \ stress-ng -c 1 --cpu-load 99 --cpu-load-slice 1000
The first task (SCHED_EXT) can run on CPU0 or CPU1. The second task (SCHED_FIFO) is pinned to CPU0 and consumes ~99% of it. If the SCHED_EXT task initially runs on CPU0, it will remain there because it always sees CPU0 as "idle" in the short gaps left by the RT task, resulting in ~1% utilization while CPU1 stays idle:
0[||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%] 8[ 0.0%] 1[ 0.0%] 9[ 0.0%] 2[ 0.0%] 10[ 0.0%] 3[ 0.0%] 11[ 0.0%] 4[ 0.0%] 12[ 0.0%] 5[ 0.0%] 13[ 0.0%] 6[ 0.0%] 14[ 0.0%] 7[ 0.0%] 15[ 0.0%] PID USER PRI NI S CPU CPU%▽MEM% TIME+ Command 1067 root RT 0 R 0 99.0 0.2 0:31.16 stress-ng-cpu [run] 975 arighi 20 0 R 0 1.0 0.0 0:26.32 yes
By allowing scx_bpf_reenqueue_local() to re-enqueue migration-disabled tasks, the scheduler can choose to migrate them to other CPUs (CPU1 in this case) via ops.enqueue(), leading to better CPU utilization:
0[||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%] 8[ 0.0%] 1[||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%] 9[ 0.0%] 2[ 0.0%] 10[ 0.0%] 3[ 0.0%] 11[ 0.0%] 4[ 0.0%] 12[ 0.0%] 5[ 0.0%] 13[ 0.0%] 6[ 0.0%] 14[ 0.0%] 7[ 0.0%] 15[ 0.0%] PID USER PRI NI S CPU CPU%▽MEM% TIME+ Command 577 root RT 0 R 0 100.0 0.2 0:23.17 stress-ng-cpu [run] 555 arighi 20 0 R 1 100.0 0.0 0:28.67 yes
It's debatable whether per-CPU tasks should be re-enqueued as well, but doing so is probably safer: the scheduler can recognize re-enqueued tasks through the %SCX_ENQ_REENQ flag, reassess their placement, and either put them back at the head of the local DSQ or let another task attempt to take the CPU.
This also prevents giving per-CPU tasks an implicit priority boost, which would otherwise make them more likely to reclaim CPUs preempted by higher scheduling classes.
Fixes: 97e13ecb02668 ("sched_ext: Skip per-CPU tasks in scx_bpf_reenqueue_local()") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v6.15+ Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi arighi@nvidia.com Acked-by: Changwoo Min changwoo@igalia.com Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo tj@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- kernel/sched/ext.c | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/sched/ext.c +++ b/kernel/sched/ext.c @@ -6794,12 +6794,8 @@ __bpf_kfunc u32 scx_bpf_reenqueue_local( * CPUs disagree, they use %ENQUEUE_RESTORE which is bypassed to * the current local DSQ for running tasks and thus are not * visible to the BPF scheduler. - * - * Also skip re-enqueueing tasks that can only run on this - * CPU, as they would just be re-added to the same local - * DSQ without any benefit. */ - if (p->migration_pending || is_migration_disabled(p) || p->nr_cpus_allowed == 1) + if (p->migration_pending) continue;
dispatch_dequeue(rq, p);