diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/scheduler/sched-design.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/scheduler/sched-design.txt | 165 |
1 files changed, 165 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-design.txt b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-design.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..1605bf0cba8 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-design.txt @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ + Goals, Design and Implementation of the + new ultra-scalable O(1) scheduler + + + This is an edited version of an email Ingo Molnar sent to + lkml on 4 Jan 2002. It describes the goals, design, and + implementation of Ingo's new ultra-scalable O(1) scheduler. + Last Updated: 18 April 2002. + + +Goal +==== + +The main goal of the new scheduler is to keep all the good things we know +and love about the current Linux scheduler: + + - good interactive performance even during high load: if the user + types or clicks then the system must react instantly and must execute + the user tasks smoothly, even during considerable background load. + + - good scheduling/wakeup performance with 1-2 runnable processes. + + - fairness: no process should stay without any timeslice for any + unreasonable amount of time. No process should get an unjustly high + amount of CPU time. + + - priorities: less important tasks can be started with lower priority, + more important tasks with higher priority. + + - SMP efficiency: no CPU should stay idle if there is work to do. + + - SMP affinity: processes which run on one CPU should stay affine to + that CPU. Processes should not bounce between CPUs too frequently. + + - plus additional scheduler features: RT scheduling, CPU binding. + +and the goal is also to add a few new things: + + - fully O(1) scheduling. Are you tired of the recalculation loop + blowing the L1 cache away every now and then? Do you think the goodness + loop is taking a bit too long to finish if there are lots of runnable + processes? This new scheduler takes no prisoners: wakeup(), schedule(), + the timer interrupt are all O(1) algorithms. There is no recalculation + loop. There is no goodness loop either. + + - 'perfect' SMP scalability. With the new scheduler there is no 'big' + runqueue_lock anymore - it's all per-CPU runqueues and locks - two + tasks on two separate CPUs can wake up, schedule and context-switch + completely in parallel, without any interlocking. All + scheduling-relevant data is structured for maximum scalability. + + - better SMP affinity. The old scheduler has a particular weakness that + causes the random bouncing of tasks between CPUs if/when higher + priority/interactive tasks, this was observed and reported by many + people. The reason is that the timeslice recalculation loop first needs + every currently running task to consume its timeslice. But when this + happens on eg. an 8-way system, then this property starves an + increasing number of CPUs from executing any process. Once the last + task that has a timeslice left has finished using up that timeslice, + the recalculation loop is triggered and other CPUs can start executing + tasks again - after having idled around for a number of timer ticks. + The more CPUs, the worse this effect. + + Furthermore, this same effect causes the bouncing effect as well: + whenever there is such a 'timeslice squeeze' of the global runqueue, + idle processors start executing tasks which are not affine to that CPU. + (because the affine tasks have finished off their timeslices already.) + + The new scheduler solves this problem by distributing timeslices on a + per-CPU basis, without having any global synchronization or + recalculation. + + - batch scheduling. A significant proportion of computing-intensive tasks + benefit from batch-scheduling, where timeslices are long and processes + are roundrobin scheduled. The new scheduler does such batch-scheduling + of the lowest priority tasks - so nice +19 jobs will get + 'batch-scheduled' automatically. With this scheduler, nice +19 jobs are + in essence SCHED_IDLE, from an interactiveness point of view. + + - handle extreme loads more smoothly, without breakdown and scheduling + storms. + + - O(1) RT scheduling. For those RT folks who are paranoid about the + O(nr_running) property of the goodness loop and the recalculation loop. + + - run fork()ed children before the parent. Andrea has pointed out the + advantages of this a few months ago, but patches for this feature + do not work with the old scheduler as well as they should, + because idle processes often steal the new child before the fork()ing + CPU gets to execute it. + + +Design +====== + +The core of the new scheduler contains the following mechanisms: + + - *two* priority-ordered 'priority arrays' per CPU. There is an 'active' + array and an 'expired' array. The active array contains all tasks that + are affine to this CPU and have timeslices left. The expired array + contains all tasks which have used up their timeslices - but this array + is kept sorted as well. The active and expired array is not accessed + directly, it's accessed through two pointers in the per-CPU runqueue + structure. If all active tasks are used up then we 'switch' the two + pointers and from now on the ready-to-go (former-) expired array is the + active array - and the empty active array serves as the new collector + for expired tasks. + + - there is a 64-bit bitmap cache for array indices. Finding the highest + priority task is thus a matter of two x86 BSFL bit-search instructions. + +the split-array solution enables us to have an arbitrary number of active +and expired tasks, and the recalculation of timeslices can be done +immediately when the timeslice expires. Because the arrays are always +access through the pointers in the runqueue, switching the two arrays can +be done very quickly. + +this is a hybride priority-list approach coupled with roundrobin +scheduling and the array-switch method of distributing timeslices. + + - there is a per-task 'load estimator'. + +one of the toughest things to get right is good interactive feel during +heavy system load. While playing with various scheduler variants i found +that the best interactive feel is achieved not by 'boosting' interactive +tasks, but by 'punishing' tasks that want to use more CPU time than there +is available. This method is also much easier to do in an O(1) fashion. + +to establish the actual 'load' the task contributes to the system, a +complex-looking but pretty accurate method is used: there is a 4-entry +'history' ringbuffer of the task's activities during the last 4 seconds. +This ringbuffer is operated without much overhead. The entries tell the +scheduler a pretty accurate load-history of the task: has it used up more +CPU time or less during the past N seconds. [the size '4' and the interval +of 4x 1 seconds was found by lots of experimentation - this part is +flexible and can be changed in both directions.] + +the penalty a task gets for generating more load than the CPU can handle +is a priority decrease - there is a maximum amount to this penalty +relative to their static priority, so even fully CPU-bound tasks will +observe each other's priorities, and will share the CPU accordingly. + +the SMP load-balancer can be extended/switched with additional parallel +computing and cache hierarchy concepts: NUMA scheduling, multi-core CPUs +can be supported easily by changing the load-balancer. Right now it's +tuned for my SMP systems. + +i skipped the prev->mm == next->mm advantage - no workload i know of shows +any sensitivity to this. It can be added back by sacrificing O(1) +schedule() [the current and one-lower priority list can be searched for a +that->mm == current->mm condition], but costs a fair number of cycles +during a number of important workloads, so i wanted to avoid this as much +as possible. + +- the SMP idle-task startup code was still racy and the new scheduler +triggered this. So i streamlined the idle-setup code a bit. We do not call +into schedule() before all processors have started up fully and all idle +threads are in place. + +- the patch also cleans up a number of aspects of sched.c - moves code +into other areas of the kernel where it's appropriate, and simplifies +certain code paths and data constructs. As a result, the new scheduler's +code is smaller than the old one. + + Ingo |