On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 16:47 +0200, Sébastien Dugué wrote:
>   there seems to be something wrong with the way the CFS balances (or does not
> balance) RT tasks. This was evidenced using the sched_football testcase
> available from the RT wiki 
> (http://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/IBM_Test_Cases)
> which I modified and attached to this mail.
> 
>   The testcase starts a number of threads which fall into 3 categories:
> 
>       1 referee thread: SCHED_FIFO, RT prio 5
>       ncpus defensive threads: SCHED_FIFO, RT prio 4
>       ncpus offensive threads: SCHED_FIFO, RT prio 3
> 
>       (ncpus being the number of CPUs)
> 
>   To make a long story short, the defensive threads should end up distributed
> among all CPUs, but that's not the case. For example, on a dual HT Xeon box,
> after task migration stabilizes we have the following running on the different
> CPUs:
> 
>   CPU 0: defense2
>   CPU 1: referee offense2 offense3 offense4 defense3
>   CPU 2: offense1
>   CPU 3: defense1 defense4
> 
> which clearly show the imbalance between CPU 2 and CPU 3 where offense1
> should not be allowed to run while the higher prio defense1 and defense4
> are sharing the same CPU.
> 
>   The following patch fixes this by re-enabling the RT overload detection
> for the CFS. It may not be the right solution, maybe it should be incorporated
> into the other load balancing mechanisms. I did not digg deep enough yet
> to make that call ;-)

2.6.21.5-rt20 plus this patch passed 1000 runs of the standard
sched_football on an 8 processor (quad dual-core) x86-64 box.  Nice
work.

>   The RT overload mechanism of the O(1) scheduler has not been activated
> in the new CFS.
> 
>   This patch fixes that by inserting calls to inc_rt_tasks() and 
> dec_rt_tasks()
> in enqueue_task_rt() and dequeue_task_rt() respectively, which enables the
> balance_rt_tasks() to be run in the rt_overload case.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sébastien Dugué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Acked-by: Josh Triplett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

- Josh Triplett


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to