Re: On migrate_disable() and latencies

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Fri Jul 22 2011 - 06:50:20 EST

On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 12:19 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 02:37 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > - Twist your brain around the schedulability impact of the
> > migrate_disable() approach.
> >
> > A really interesting research topic for our friends from the
> > academic universe. Relevant and conclusive (even short notice)
> > papers and/or talks on that topic have a reserved slot in the
> > Kernel developers track at the Realtime Linux Workshop in Prague
> > in October this year.
> From what I can tell it can induce a latency in the order of
> max-migrate-disable-period * nr-cpus.
> The scenario is on where you stack N migrate-disable tasks on a run
> queue (necessarily of increasing priority). Doing this requires all cpus
> in the system to be as busy, for otherwise the task would simply be
> moved to another cpu.

This implies it requires at least nr-cpus^2 tasks to pull this off. So
if you want to add the nr-tasks constraint the actual limit is something

max-migrate-disable-period * min(nr-cpus, nr-tasks / nr_cpus);

> Anyway, once you manage to stack these migrate-disable tasks, all other
> tasks go to sleep, leaving a vacuum. Normally we would migrate tasks to
> fill the vacuum left by the tasks going to sleep, but clearly
> migrate-disable prohibits this.
> So we have this stack of migrate-disable tasks and M-1 idle cpus (loss
> of utilization). Now it takes the length of the migrate-disable region
> of the highest priority task on the stack (the one running) to complete
> and enable migration again. This will instantly move the task away to an
> idle cpu. This will then need to happen min(N-1, M-1) times before the
> lowest priority migrate_disable task can run again or all cpus are busy.
> Therefore the worst case latency is in the order of
> max-migrate-disable-period * nr-cpus.
> Currently we have no means of measuring these latencies, this is
> something we need to grow, I think Steven can fairly easy craft a
> migrate_disable runtime tracer -- it needs to use t->se.sum_exec_runtime
> for measure so as to only count the actual time spend on the task and
> ignore any time it was blocked.
> Once we have this, its back to the old game of 'lock'-breaking.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at